skip to Main Content

(UPDATED) POLL: Vote your future Micro Four Thirds wish list.


UPDATE: This is the final call! Vote now if you haven’t done it yet. I will close the poll tomorrow!

It’s now time to send a message in the bottle for Olympus, Panasonic, Sigma, Samyang and Voigtländer. Here is a wish list of lenses from our readers. Before to vote please read the following text:

1) The poll contains a filtered list of lenses suggested by 43rumors readers (Click here to read all your suggestions). Please be aware that I had to pickup a selection from your suggestion. Every reader wants slightly different versions from the same focal length and I counted over 1.000 different lens options :)

2) This is not a scientific poll. The goal is to get a very general idea about the lenses 43rumors readers would love to see. If you don’t find your suggested or preferred lens please choose the lens that is as close as it gets to what you need.

3) Be sincere and realistic. Some of the lenses will be very expensive. Don’t vote them if you like them but can’t afford to buy them.

4) You can select a maximum of ten lenses. After sending your vote you will see a percentage number close to every lens option. A number like 14% for example means that 14% of all single voters choose that lens. Be aware that the sum of all single percentages is well over 100% because every voter can chose up to ten lenses!

Now let’s start!

Select a maximum of ten lenses:

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

P.S.: Thanks to all readers for your lens suggestions!

  • YeahYeah

    I would definitively go for F1.2 primes!

    • Bob B.

      I would like to see that too, but they would be huge (relative to other MFT offering) and very expensive….
      …but if Voigtlander can make a .95 manual lens..then an autofocus f/1.2 is certainly feasible.

      • Anonymous

        I would love to see it if Pana or Oly can make it the current version of 25 mm F0.95 with AF or even crazier to also make another ” ‘NOCT GLASS ” Like
        35mm F0.95 AF,
        42mm F0.95 AF
        50mm F 0.95 AF ,.. + three additional of fast zoom glass which is ;

        12-60mm F2.5-4 macro weather sealed similar of 43 version
        14-150mm F2.8-4 and
        50-200mm F2.8 constant aperture with weather sealed

        • Xzei

          So you would like to pay 30000+$ for your 3 primes? I do highly doubt that.

        • Bob B.

          I cannot believe that the top 4 requested lenses are zooms. ICK! :-)

          • I voted for them because I cant afford to keep buying only primes…

          • Good high quality limited range zooms are as good as primes for many occasions.

            • Bob B.

              The problem is ..that the quality usually isn’t there with zooms. They are just mediocre at everything. I can see that this dream list is about improving that quality though.

      • Anonymous

        Fast lenses require much more glass to cover full frame… MFT is not a toy, give it the weapons it deserves!! There’s already 700 stupid slow zooms for it…
        Wide and fast.

  • most of the lenses that I want/need are already available or coming soon, could do with some funky lenses that aren’t even on the list eg action samplers (4 and 9 way), 360 degree lenses etc…

  • Vivek

    A proper T/S adapter to use SLR lenses in Olympus OM, Nikon F , etc mounts.

    Voigt 0.95 lenses are always welcome. :)

    I would also like a proper m4/3rd sized versatile flash (look at Samsung) as well as a m4/3rds sized macro flash (like the Nikon R1C1).

    A dedicated B&W sensor camera. ;)

    • Frederic Hew

      Tilt and Shift adapters are already available (though seperately).

      The problem is the crop factor which doubles the equivalent FL thus eliminating most if not all good wide-angle alternatives.

      • Vivek

        There is no point in having a shift only or a tilt only adapter. There is enough space to make a *proper* T/S adapter. It is the crop factor that helps use a 35mm FF lens on the m4/3rds.

        Excellent quality wide angle lenses are available, even ultrawide zooms are available!!

        • Frederic Hew

          No point in shift or tilt only probably means you cannot see the point. In fact tilt and shift are used for different applications (DOF control vs perspective control).

          Excellent wide angle lenses = ??? Wide on a FF or 2x crop sensor?

          • Vivek

            You seem to know a whole lot more than I do. :) The widest rectilinear lens in m4/3rds is a 12mm. Check out what Sigma offers for FF and APS-C, for example. There is Tamron and Sam Yang as well plus the system lenses from the various brands. ;)

            • Frederic Hew

              I have never used a PC lens, but apply perspective correction in lightroom when needed, e.g. in urben/architecture photography. It is also useful for product photography where I guess one would use longer focal lengths, I think (honestly I never got into that).

              If you are refering to primes, the widest FF rectilinear lens from Sigma is 20mm. The 14mm Samyang does qualify as a moderate wide angle. I’m not sure whether Tamron actually has FF lenses. In zooms (FF) Sigma starts with 12mm, which is a classic PC focal length. Unfortunately AFAIK it does not have an aperture ring.

              Leica m and other RF lenses shorter than 35mm are not recommended for m43 (which doesn’t mean one cannot use them).

              This is far from being a definitive list, there are *probably* some workable options but *probably* not many.

              To be honest I was thinking in terms of “legacy” or older MF lenses, silly me. Nevertheless, I’m not convinced the situation has changed.

      • rrr_hhh

        You are absolutely right. I second that we don’t need more adapters, we need a native solution. Also it would keep the lenses smaller if the two things are separated : one lens for shift and one fr tilt. Those who want tilt already have the lens babies to play with. So what we really need is a 12mm shift lens.

    • rrr_hhh

      Adapters are not so usefull for people shooting architecture : there are quasi no ultra wide in ff format. You need a 12mm to shoot architecture. The only existing and discontinued lens is the 12mm Heliar of Voigtländer. I think that Nikon had a 13mm but it is huge and they have 14 or 15mm.. But with 15mm you are already at 30mm equivalent which is not wide enough.

      It would be better to have a native shift lens. I could imagine either Voigtländer or Samyang making one. IMO t would be better to keep shift and tilt separated : they serve different purpose and putting the two together would make the lenses too big which is not the philosophy of mft.

    • Miroslav

      “I would also like a proper m4/3rd sized versatile flash (look at Samsung)”

      I agree on the need for a small versatile flash, but disagree that Samsung model should be followed. Their three flashes mirror what is available for m4/3: FL-14, FL-300R and FL-36R. What we need are more capable small flashes, like Nikon SB30, Sunpak PF20XD or Sunpak RD2000, with self auto and super FP modes, not units that are larger than camera body and have limited features.

      • Digifan

        Absolutely agree with you.
        The FL50R is way too large even the new FL600R is way out of proportion.
        Can’t we be more innovative an develop a small slender flash with as much power as the FL600R/FL40, that can be “folded” in some way. Make it possible to let it use the AP2, so the camera’s battery can charge it too if it’s own batteries are worn out!

        • Miroslav

          I’d like it to draw power from camera battery. I always carry two anyway, and it’s easier for me to buy one more than to have two types of batteries to deal with…

          Maybe they could make a hump-shaped flash for PENs, similar to what has been proposed in this Canon concept: .

          Too much imitating in the camera world nowadays IMO.

  • I miss a 14-54 2.8-3.5 ;-)

    • Gabi

      I agree! Therefore, I recently bought the Oly 14-54 MkII for the E-M5 (which is on preorder). I would prefer a native MFT lens, though, with fast AF and weather sealed.

    • mokin

      14-54 -> 12-60mm f/2.8-3.5 weather sealed ;)

      • bilgy_no1

        But in 4/3 the 12-60 sells for double the price of the 14-54. The latter is a very good quality/price product for amateur photographers wanting jjust a little bit more IQ.

        @ Admin: What’s up with that ‘300mm f/2 Metal’? Anyone going to use such a beast on their $1000 micro body? If you want Olympus and Panasonic to pay attention to this list, you’d better stick to serious options. I bet their having a big laugh at the respective design studios over this list! 17-20mm f/1.7-2.0, Nice zoom range at 1.18x zoom! Still, 79 people voted for it?

  • 43pr0n

    In your list, there’s a 12-60/f2.8-3.5, but Oly’s 12-60 had f/2.8-4.0 aperture.

  • verdant

    surprised theres not been more votes for the 0.5x high optical quality. it should sit between the body and lens. even just an OM one would be great.

  • I really wonder why bright portrait primes (45/1.2, 70/1.2, 50/1.4) have received such low scores and why everybody wants ultra expensive bright standard zoms…

    • Me

      Because the already-existing 45/1.8 is all we need ;-)

      • The 45/1.8 is my highest priority too (beside of 45-200 or really good priced 45-175), but a little brighter version still would be welcomed. Anyway, you’re right, the 45/1.8 is definitely the one I really can afford.

      • Digifan

        It needs to be weathersealed

    • @kesztio: Because there are already so a good number of bright primes out or coming out soon. There really isn’t any really good alternatives for bright standard and short telephoto zooms. Some of do have to work with zooms for its flexibility (ie. on location). I use both, but I’ve been going more and more to my 4/3 Zuiko 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 zoom as my workhorse lens.

      Joe Gunawan |

      • mokin

        I agree.

        • MJr

          So does I.

          12-35 F2 would be golden, and F2.8 ‘be fine as well. Panasonic’s version with power-zoom (ugh!) does not strike my fancy aesthetically. I know, but whatever that’s how it is. I like how olympus does things, when they really try, especially the high end stuff.

    • Stageshadow

      There is the 45mm f1,8 and soon the 75mm f1,8 i think that is enought for portrait shooters, also no one wants to pay for the super expensive f1,2 aperture…

      • MJr

        I do, i do ! I know it isn’t necessary, but i like glass that few others are crazy enough to buy. Not everyone might think that is a valid reason, but then i wouldn’t be buying it for anyone but myself would i ;).

      • jimramk

        The 12-35mm Panasonic isn’t power zoom as far I’ve heard. In any case, it has a proper zoom ring too.

    • Anything larger than f/1.4 would be considered a specialty item and priced accordingly. The 45/1.8 already offers plenty of DOF flexibility, not to mention the upcoming 75mm. If you are after thin DOF get yourself a cheap Samyang 85.

    • Good quality zooms with limited zoom range are very handy and provide excellent flexibility. I would prefer such zooms over primes for most use. One lens on the camera is worth 3 in the pocket. (more often than not, same as a camera at home doesn’t take pictures).
      Back in the 60s it was all primes the few zooms available were expensive and to be blunt, crap and they got cheaper and mostly the quality did not until the 80s.
      I think that today’s quality zooms are as good as many primes. (quality does not mean expensive though it may)

  • My “wishlist”:covering all important range in photography=7-14 2.8 TOK,14-70 2.0-2.8 ZUIKO(a really nice all-rounder,even good for portaits)
    the famous ZUIKO 50-200 2.8-3.5,now(4.0@200???) shrinked to mFT…a 100F2 as portrait-lens(but as we will see the 75 1.4 soon,not really needful…)and for “WILDLIFE” 300F4…
    BUT I´M STILL DREAMING OF SOMETHING SIMULAR TO THE CANON TS-E 17mm 4.0 or TS-E 24mm 3.5 wich means:at least a mFT Lens Tilt/Shift 12mm 4.0!!

    • For wildlife it would be fine if there would be a lens up to 400 mm…

    • MJr

      Dude, CAPS LOCK.

  • WT21

    Fast zoom in the 12-35 or maybe 50 range. Don’t care about weather sealing, and an EPM1 with the OMD sensor.

    That’s all I need.

  • Warter

    Panasonic 14-140 X lens would be very good. It must be at least same optical quality but smaller size and half weight.

    • mokin

      I agree. But my select choose 12-120 mm
      Bacause I want wide angle more than.

  • twoomy

    Let’s hear it for that 12-60! Heck, take the same design as the 43’s version, make it auto-focus quickly on m43 cameras, and color me happy! I don’t care if it’s big. A single convenient zoom that’s bright at the wide-end and has corner-to-corner sharpness throughout its range. That would be awesome.

    • Have you tried mounting the 4/3 version on an E-P3? You will be surprised by the AF speed.

      • JF

        For what I saw it’s not very impressive, it is jerky and time to focus is in the range of 1s to 2s no ? I agree it starts to be usable but not fast enough in my opinion…

      • twoomy

        I have a GH2 and I’ve seen videos of sample tests. Yes, usable for landscape work, but a little slow and jerky. I’m on the fence about getting this 43 classic with adaptor or just waiting (and waiting and waiting?) for a m43 answer to it.

    • JF


  • how about Lightroom/PC/MAC tethered capture?

  • Frederic Hew

    300mm f/2 weather sealed and constructed of metal… how big and heavy do you suppose this lens will be? The 4/3 300/2.8 could be a good reference point.

    Too many suggestions on this list make absolutely no sense IMO.

    • That was my thought, too. It looks like it was gleaned from the previous wish list thread.

    • bilgy_no1

      There is some utterly insane stuff on this wish list. Hardly possible, let alone economically viable.

    • Mike

      No doubt. 300 f2 Is crazy. No manufacturer will
      build it because no one will buy it for 1 simple reason no one
      needs such a thing, not for m4/3. Can’t believe more people would vote
      for this rather than a superwide tilt shift for architecture and landscapes.

      A quality 300 f4 would be fast enough, affordable and

      • rrr_hhh

        Plus one !

        • Boooo!

          A 300mm f/4 would have a front lens element of 7.5 cm minimum and would be longer in length and likely more expensive than the 150mm f/2, so 2000€ minimum, probably 3-4000€ due to the m4/3 price premium.

          • Mr. Reeee

            No kidding. Check out the Nikon ED 300mm f4.5 internal focusing lens. It’s 80mm x 200mm, weighs 1060g (35 oz.) and uses 72mm filters. Supposedly it’s a fantastic lens, but I can just hear the complaints about lack of balance on PENS and GF3s.

            I thought about it, then bought a 100-300mm. Since I pretty much only use the 100-300mm at 300mm, I’m thinking about it again.

            So, yeah, a native prime 300mm with really good IQ would be fantastic.

            • Which might be a good argument for a 300/5.6 of high quality.

          • bilgy_no1

            No, Canon and Nikon versions of 300/4 lenses cost around €1200. m43 would be around the same price I guess.

    • Boooo!

      A 300mm f/2 lens would have a 15cm front lens element. That would be funny to see – I guess the price would be at least 15000€ for such a lens, probably more.

  • SteveO

    Admin, you should run a poll on what feature is most looked for in a future mFT body as well. I’d include 1) an AF system similar to the V1’s allowing for action and birds in flight photography, 2) focus peaking, 3) no black out when shooting action/BIF in the EVF and 4) a more natural appearing image in the EVF. Basically, eliminating all remaining compromises.

    The E-M5 has put a lot of the pieces together in a great body, but still a ways to go. Maybe in their pro model?

    • You don’t really want #3, as its only possible in a non-TTL design. I’ll take peaking, as it appears to be useful.

    • bilgy_no1

      Good idea. My vote is for 1) also to enable fast AF on those excellent 4/3 lenses.

  • Peppone

    Tilt-shift have much more sense in ultrawide angle configuration, I will buy an 8mm TS not a 45mm TS.

  • Miroslav

    Come on people, support 0.5x reversed teleconverter for legacy lenses :)! It would be awesome to use old lenses at their nominal focal length!

    • Geoff

      What would be the point, the extra elements in doing that would negate the quality of those lenses.

      • Mal

        Wow. I can’t believe the lack votes on the 0.5x teleconverter.

        It takes a 50mm f1.4 lens and makes it a 50mm FF equivalent F0.7 by concentrating the light onto the smaller image circle. Or how about a 100 f2.8 into a 100mm equivalent F1.4 bokeh-master.

        There are many 2x teleconverters that prove the quality can be maintained if the converter is super high grade. And using a 0.5x the density is increased, not decreased, so the image quality from the old lenses should be improved, especially because you can close down the aperture a little.

        Holy shit batman.

    • And I want a pony!

      I almost voted for that one, but the problem is that such an adapter has to be specific to each lens in order to deliver adequate quality.

      • Miroslav

        EC-14 and EC-20 teleconverters are not lens specific. Although wide converters located between camera and lens are yet to be realized ( the patent is held by Kodak if I’m not mistaken ) and we can only speculate on their performance, Olympus has incorporated one in the design of 14-35 and 35-100 F2 lenses.

        That such a device would be mount specific, but Oly could start with making one for OM mount, while Kenko ( Tokina ) or Novoflex could make them for other manual lens mounts.

        Add focus peaking for determining the focus zone and a small movable element that would be controlled by camera for fine focus adjustment and you can have autofocus on many manual lenses… A dream, but not impossible to make. It’s easier to buy a pony, of coure :).

        And yes, the edges would be problematic, because those lenses were not telecentric and there would be problems similar to those on older NEX cameras.

        • “Olympus has incorporated one in the design of 14-35 and 35-100 F2 lenses.”

          I didn’t know that, does that mean that they are actually 28-70 and 70-200 with built-in wide converter? It would explain their size.

          • Miroslav

            It was mentioned and a even a link with lens cutaway was left somewhere in discussions on 43rumors. There’s a vague mention about it in comments here: .

            • I see it:

              comment made by Compositor20:
              “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”

              and by Nathan:
              “Those front-of-lens adapters don’t concentrate the light path to the sensor by reducing the image circle and are thus entirely separate from the patented 0.5x teleconverter.
              The reverse teleconverter sits between a lens of larger image circle (OM) and reduces its image circle to the dimensions of m43. In doing so, it increases the light density at the sensor and preserves the lens’ original depth of field characteristics.
              This means that a nifty fifty OM lens of 50mm f1.8 would look just like it should, except exposure would be faster due to the density of light striking the sensor. So, you could say it would be a 25mm f1.2 or f1.4.

              Interestingly, this is how lenses like the 35-100 f2 and 11-22 zoom. They are built like prime lenses with a reverse teleconverter at the rear- but this teleconverter is integrated and perfectly matched to the rest of the lens.”

              thanks Miroslav!

    • Esa Tuunanen

      Actual name for such product would be focal reducer because that’s basically what it would do.

    • Mike

      What kind of resolution could such a universal
      converter possibly provide? My guess is not enough.

      • Miroslav

        That depends on the lens used more than on the adapter.

  • Admin please add 50mm f2.4 pancake to the list! It’s the most important missing lens in the system!

    We must have a compact set of 3 pancakes!

    Also please add 20mm f1.4 pancake (if you think is possible)

    • Ron

      I totally agree. To me, the compact m43 bodies make most sense with compact lenses.

  • the list is so arbitrary and biased and narrowing that I could not find ONE choice in your selection
    this polll is useless and would be confusing
    Hope Olympus is NOT listening


  • Digifan

    I’d say all weathersealed:
    14 or 17mm F1.8, a 300mm F4 maybe 135/150mm F2.8 or F3.5, a relative bright zoom 14-60mm F2.8-F3.5 and a 45-200mm F2.8-F3.5.
    Those wouldn’t be exorbitantly high priced.
    Small X zoom-lenses with a small focus and zoom ring would be welcome too.

  • Lily

    I want a faster/quieter focusing 20mm pancake, and a 45 or 50mm pancake.

  • JF

    12-50 f2 !!!??? Lol are you kidding ? I agree that on paper it is the perfect lens but do you know that the olympus 14-35 f2 costs 2100 euros and weight 900 gr. 12-50 f2 will be huge on any m43 camera. It is totally unreallistic…

    • Thomas S

      12-50 is a big range for such a bright zoom, but maybe it is possible to build a 12-35/2 or 14-35/2 that is smaller than the FT Zuiko 14-35/2? The small register distance of MFT should make the construction of smaller wide angle lenses possible.

      They could also opt for correcting lens aberrations a bit less to save some glass. I am not a big fan of that, but if they kept the aberrations within reasonable limits (it doesn’t have to be perfect), I would love to use such a lens.

      • bilgy_no1

        Look at the mock-ups for the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8. Then consider the difference from the 14-54 f/2.8-3.5 to the 14-35 f/2.

        It may be possible, but will there be enough people to pay the kind of money that such a lens will cost?

  • Talking about being “realistic”, the second and third in the current top are 12-35mm f/2.0 and 12-50mm f/2.0,
    which I believe are yet to be made by any company. The only available now Olympus 14-35mm f/2.0 for 4/3 is about $2200 and in some people opinion is “a huge waste of money. It’s good enough optically, but it is more expensive than the Nikon or Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 is physically larger than those full-frame lenses, and will focus excessively slow on your camera.”

    • Esa Tuunanen

      Without mirror in the way 12/14-35mm range could be done with lesser degree of retrofocus design so that would be actually one the lenses which should be possible to make clearly smaller for mirrorless mount.

      And that Canon 24-70mm isn’t even nearly as high quality as Zuikos so direct comparison is valueless. It has higher distortions, lot higher vignetting wide open, needs stopping down for best resolution and very nasty field curvature:

  • nicwalmsley

    Super big thank you to Admin for putting this together.

  • Ganec

    I don’t want new lanses, I want a new body with features which Sony already have:
    – 1st electronic shutter
    – in-camera HDR and low-noise-high-iso-multi-shot mode

  • Anonymous

    f2 zooms are not going to happen.
    They will DWARF the size of the camera.

    More reasonable zooms + fast primes will be the way to go for m4/3.

    Funny how some people ask for 14-70mm f2-f2.8, but “NOT TOO EXPENSIVE” haha… that’s a $2k lens easy.

  • I voted for a handful of fast primes, I’m quite tired of zooms. if they are fast, then they are large and heavy, if they are small, then they are slow. This summer, February here in the southern hemisphere, I went to the southern Chilean forests and brought with me my E5 with 11-22, 14-35 F2, 50-200 and 50 f2 macro, also my EP-3 with 12mm f2, 25 f1.4 summilux and 45 f1.8. Well, 90% of the pictures were taken with the last set, which is a joy to carry. The E5 set spent most of the time at the cottage. I’m not going back to large SLRs. Soon I will have an E-M5 and I don’t even think on trading the portability of M43 for the Mpix of something like the Nikon D800, no way.

    Good fast primes produce pictures of higher quality than those from zooms.

  • avds

    Although Admin failed to include the option for a “12-1200 f/0.95 cheap high grade weather sealed pancake power zoom”, it looks like this option has won nevertheless with the help of all those numerous unrealistic requests for the huge, heavy and mega expensive 3x/4x bright zooms…

    I wish though I saw some 2x f/2 zoom options on the list, such as the 11-22 or my own suggestions for a combo of 12-25 and 35-70 f2 zooms. I’m sure that’s the only way to get bright zooms into the m43 system as long as it hopefully remains dedicated to lightweight and relatively inexpensive shooting.

  • Miroslav

    “It’s now time to send a message in the bottle for Olympus, Panasonic, Sigma, Samyang and Voigtländer”

    … and Tamron, Tokina, Schneider, Zeiss and SLR Magic. We need more bottles :).

    • Duchemin

      Miroslav, you are right!

      I am very interested in seeing what Schneider will do for m43!

      Did Zeiss join m43 too? I didn’t know that.

        • Duchemin

          Thanks for the hint, although not my budget though. Sure they could do something small and with great IQ in the Voigtländer price range

          • rrr_hhh

            they do lenses for movies, there’s here the mft mount is starting to penetrate. There is at least one movie camera issued last year.

  • Brian

    Voted for the OIS 20mm. All I want from micro four thirds is a fast stabilized prime for video usage.

  • DP

    I really think we need a fast, premium 17, but won’t go so far as to dictate the size.

    As for the fast zooms, if it were possible to do it in a size that would make sense, they’d have done it.

    • Anonymous

      Fools repeatedly claiming it was a dead format could certainly have delayed 3rd party R&D

    • Mike


  • Esa Tuunanen

    Besides filtering those suggestions some reasonability check would be good.
    Like this one:
    15-200mm f/4.0-6.0 -> collapsible, fast AF
    Obviously it’s meant as that all in one travel lens but how well can it do that when its wide angle is sacrificed to remind more of those in older compacts?

    Or this one:
    7-11mm f/3.5-4 compact
    Lumix G 7-14mm isn’t really that big so what’s the point in here? Spreading constant iteration of slightly differing variants from standard kit zooms also to other lenses?

    And except for weather sealing I think extension tube part got covered by Kenko… unless Oly/Pana would make cheaper ones.

    • I agree.
      There are a few improvements we may want to see in the next generation wide-angle zoom lens though, however being more compact than Panasonic 7-14mm is not one of them. Slightly faster (brighter to say 3.5), going to farther on longer end (say to 18mm), and add filter threads (good for video, etc.)

    • Mr. Reeee

      Absolutely. Countless releases with minuscule iterations degrades the M4/3 system by adding another layer of confusion.

      As for the 7-14mm, I was walking around shooting with mine today thinking the same thing about the size. It’s neither big, nor awkward, nor heavy. I would love it (and pay for it) if it were f3.5, but it’s a great lens. If all people care about are tiny and/or collapsible lenses, buy a compact camera or stick with kit lenses and pancakes. Not every focal length can be made small without sacrificing IQ.

      • Bob B.

        ++++100 7-14 Killer Lens! Not cheap tho. All the kit and compact zooms suffer severely with image quality and speed. And it is getting worse not better. Look at the collapsible Panasonic X zoom. Just a junker in the IQ dept. I guess it is great for birthday parties…but…………….

    • Miroslav

      “15-200mm f/4.0-6.0 -> collapsible, fast AF”

      That was my suggestion, so let me explain. Current all in one m4/3 travel zooms are 14-140 f/4.0-5.8 and 14-150 f/4-5.6. What these are lacking is not at the wide end IMO, but tele reach. So if they could sacrifice a mm at the wide end, expand the tele end and make it collapsible, they could make a 15-200mm f/4.0-6.0 that has similar size as Oly 14-150.

      Another one that could make such travel zoom is Tamron. They make 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 for NEX, not much larger than Pana 14-140. So if they could scale it a bit for smaller sensor, extend the wide end to 15mm, we’d get 15-200mm. Enough reach for my travel needs…

      • Esa Tuunanen

        Wouldn’t exactly hurray for Tamron producing such lens considering their history for bigger marketing numbers and fancy names.

        And that ~50mm isn’t really going to have wanted effect in tele end:
        Getting zoomed “half way closer” (object double the size in frame) needs doubling focal length so extra zoom woudn’t be that dramatic.
        Again in wide end even millimeters count.

        Also in such wide to tele all in one zooms that tele end often has clear resolution problems even without trying to make lens very compact. Leica D 14-150mm is in practise only super zoom lens which retains high sharpness through full range and at all apertures.

  • I voted – inter alia – for the 12-60 2.8-3.5 and the 50-200 2.8-4.0 (why is it supposed to be slower on the long end than the FT version?!!!).
    Nonetheless, I have to admit that I’d still rather see my FT lenses acceleratzed to full speed by a future µFT camera.

  • David

    There are items on your list which have recently been announced like extension tubes and 300mm catadioptric lens and here are items which will never be needed or made.

  • avds

    I wish somebody explained to me how the “75mm f/2.8 PANCAKE” lens can be possible in this world, since a 75mm lens would have to protrude from an m43 body by at least some 6 centimeters :)

    • hannes

      some crazy retro focal design for instance.

      I dont say that it is easy or realistic, but not every lens is longer (measured from sensor) than its focal length.


      • Anonymous

        No, it’s actually kind of the other way around. You can only increase the physical length of the lens above its FL, and this is exactly what retro focal lenses do since they are designed to be physically longer in order for an SLR body mirror to fit behind an ultra wide lens.

        I believe the only way of reducing the physical length of a telephoto lens is to make a mirror lens but I have yet to see a mirror lens fitted in a pancake design :)

    • Mal

      If the OM 100mm f2.8 can be so small, then I am sure a m43 75mm f2.8 could be tiny.

  • Thisguythere

    I find the result a bit weird;

    -fast weather sealed 17mm lens is not higher up in the list and it is quite a needed prime. Street photography and event, shows photography can only benefit from a weather sealed lens (rain, drizzle, smoke machines, sweat from ceilings in raves or rock shows) and 17mm (35mm) is the perfect focal lenght for such use.

    -12mm weather sealed: landscape/architechtural photography, not weather sealed? Seems weird to me but then again not as needed as the first one.

    -45mm 0.95: this is the one focal lenght I just won’t care if it is manual, paper thin dof however is quite nice to get at such focal lenght.

    I never thought zoom were such in high demand on interchangeable lens systems…

  • D

    So; A quick look at the results and it is pretty clear that the number one wish is a sealed wide angle to portrait fast zoom. Then we have fast telephoto zooms and a few primes significantly 17 and 25mm. I’m just curious of how important weather sealing is, I get the feeling many threw it in just for the heck of it.
    I want sealing for my telephoto lenses and a compact walk around lens (say a 12-60)for the rest of the lenses it is not really that important. Really fast lenses is more useful indoors – Don’t get me wrong weather sealing is not a bad thing but it is not a dealbreaker for most lenses.

  • 200 – 250? hope is a typo, 200-500 5.6/6.7 good IQ as small as possible is my first choice.

  • MP Burke

    There are some comical suggestions in the list. 300mm f2.0 is the obvious one, but I would rate a 10-50mm or 75mm pancake as being pretty implausible too. I think the chance of getting a 12-50mm f2.0 is zero as well: such a lens would be bigger and more expensive than the 4/3 14-35mm f2.0, which is already too expensive for my liking.

  • spam

    Why make polls like this? Ther are just too many options and interpreting the results is difficult. IMO you need to group similar lenses so you get a more manageable number. Examples: high performance telezooms, consumer levels telezooms, maybe a couple of categories for advanced standard zooms and some for wide angle zooms, and so on. You’d still get a lot of options.

  • rrr_hhh

    It was a very good idea to ask people what lenses they wanted and a good idea to design a poll. However two things will have a negative impact on the results :

    1) for sure it should have been a huge job to make a synthesis of all the wishes of the forumers, but the list s still too long and often redundant.

    2) allowing people up to 10 choices is really too much. There are not many people owning so many lenses. For instance, I very much want a shifting 12mm lens, but if I can add nine other lenses, I’m diluting my choice. IMO people shouldn’t be allowed more than three choices.

    3) it may have been interesting to include the actual lenses in the list.

    • Tropical Yeti

      I’m pretty sure there is a big difference between “what lenses voters would like to have”, and “what lenses voters would really buy” – if all of them from the list would suddenly appear in reality with high prices, optical compromises, actual size, etc..

      So I’m not sure Olympus or Panasonic can really get any valuable info from such a massive brainstorming, as this poll happened to be…

  • umm

    I love how everyone is asking for ultra fast lens.
    Probably not for the speed but for the thin DOF control without having to be “up in your face” with the subject!!

  • Woowoowoo

    Em-5 available now in the philippines (very limited stocks)! Woo woo woo!

  • My goodness, most of the leading lenses in this poll already exist in the Olympus 4/3 universe. So why not just buy an E-5 and be happy?

    You all do realize that the M.Zuiko versions of those lenses are not going to be any smaller or lighter, don’t you? And they will end up costing 20% to 50% more…

    As for me, I’ll I want are more primes, specifically, small, fast wide-angles and telephotos.

  • Darko

    I’m surprised that there is quite a low interest in longer and fast lenses. As I use E-620 for sports (basketball) I know how hard is to make a good action photo with standard zooms im low light. I’m hoping to get E-M5 with new 75 mm tele lens, and expecting primes from 90 to 200 mm.

  • The Master

    I think a zoom in the 10-25 range, with 3.5 or 4.0 fixed aperture would be a good lens, if I had to use a zoom. Most of the choices seem a bit over the top, but a 1.2 35 or 40 mm AF portrait lens, a pancake 25 mm and a 10mm 2.8 or 3.5, are sorely missed in the lens line up, at least for prime shooters.

  • pana

    There already exists 2.8 300mm Zuiko for 4/3, why can’t we have that or even 200mm 2.8 ? Birders and wildlife and sport have nothing decent at all in this system.

    • Esa Tuunanen

      Birds and sports basically need PDAF level focus tracking performance and once you have working hybrid AF 4/3 lenses should be fully focus compatible.
      And such teles won’t become smaller simply because of mirrorless mount so at least trying to make high quality ones would be duplicating existing lenses.

  • indanz

    14-100 f2.8 ois weather shield for video use, tired to do documentary with prime only…please panasonic i don’t care the weight

  • Rob

    Firstly, thanks to Admin for running this poll. This would be really great info for the optical manufacturers to get an idea of what the market does and just as importantly doesn’t want. It’s a shame rough prices weren’t on all of them though as I think that would help peoples thinking on them more.

    Taking off options with 10% or less (baring in mind this is an enthusiast site so this is the exact customer market, and 10% of enthusiasts wanting something is not that much really), then that doesn’t actually leave much of what the majority want. 20% of enthusiasts wanting something is quite a decent number to work with, and that is just 2 options on this list. As long as the price is right, those 2 lenses will sell.

  • Voldenuit

    Call me crazy, but I voted for ZERO of the lenses. Between the lenses I already have (20/1.7, 7-14/4, 45/2.8Macro) and the lenses I want (12/1.6, 75/1.8) and the other great lenses out there now (12/2, 25/1.4, 45/1.8) or coming out (12-35/2.8, 35-100/2.8), I think that m43 already has all the lenses I need for my style of shooting.

    No doubt wilderness shooters wanting long lenses or EM-5 users wanting weather sealed lenses may feel differently, though.

  • Add TAMRON for the list, please.

  • Two upgraded 17mm hit the top ten, if there is going to be a 3rd Summilux, it ought to be that one :)

    • Pasmia

      I didn’t know there was a 2nd Summilux? To clarify, “summilux” is the designation for F1.4. But if there is to be another Leica branded lens, a 17.5 or 17mm would be perfect. So would a 14mm, but it’s kind of redundant with the pancake that’s already out, which I think isn’t that bad of a lens to begin with. I still don’t understand why a fast 17mm is not here already, and 2.8 is NOT fast.

      I want more fast AF primes and I don’t understand how it’s not topping this list by a country mile. We only have one F1.4 AF lens and we’re still asking for big hulking, expensive zooms. I mean, every Oly Pen body and Panny GF and GX bodies have a rangefinder look and feel to them yet people want to attach these tiny little bodies to a huge and expensive lens? Go buy a NEX!
      I want either A:fast (1.8 or faster) primes across the focal range for $500 – $700(US) a piece or B:semi-fast (2.5 or faster) primes across the focal range for $300-$500(US) that are no bigger than the P20/1.7 or O45/1.8. I think this is where M43’s strength is at. These big hulking zooms everyone is asking for are going to drive M43 into the ground.

      • My mistake. a 3rd Leica branded.

        And for that matter, a high grade Olympus or a Panasonic X, whatever they call it, any good fast AF 17mm will do.

        As for size issue, lenses can be bigger than the 1.7/20.
        With the 25mm on, very usable at f1.4, I accept the size trade off without problems.

  • fgl42

    I want a fast 17mm, don’t care if it’s weather sealed.

  • Surefoot

    A 12mm T/S would be REALLY, REALLY nice and bring some seriousness to this system.

  • Alexey

    The list is missing 11-22mm f2.8? It is one of the best Oly lens ever made. Very useful range good for both wide angle and portraits.

  • Dim

    Tilt shift UWA for me :)

  • Steve Jobs was right. He never asked for surveys, he refused to listen to to them. He reckoned all you got from them ranged from wanting colour changes to adding more buttons. No leap forward in wants, as they did not know what they wanted until you gave it to them.
    Seems we have a similar (but not the same, possibly the opposite) problem with lenses.
    Now the difficult part, working out what to deliver. The only problem is, very few will get what they want. Will the rest feel sighted? Will the rest just say “ahh well, it was a nice thought”?

    However I would like to see a fast 17mm in the same vein as the oly 45 and same colour.

    • Mike

      Jobs was a genius. His statement about needing to showing people what they want is true when it comes to burgeoning
      technologies. Lens choices in photography, thats different.
      Ginormous f2, 4X zoom requestes that forget basic physics not withstanding.

      • Lens choice in photography! For many of those here, yes. Many of those here will never go beyond the kit lens. Many will never use a prime and many will never use a big beast of real glass like a ‘now manual’ legacy lens. I must admit moving to zooms myself. They have improved quite considerably since I first saw them a million years ago. In those days to see what was taken in a picture, it had to be taken with a prime.
        I think times have changed, the use of a prime is often a size choice now rather than a quality one for the majority of purchasers. After all many primes of an affordable variety do not work well wide open, though that is what they were purchased for and the bokeh on some? Well better left unsaid. Many zooms in the affordable category also have problems at one end or both ends.
        My choice would reasonably fast zooms that cover a range that does not tax the quality at the ends. There again there is the 12mm, and the 25mm Oh, yes, the 45mm……….

        • MJr

          Agree with Steve, and JimD.

          But i have to say primes are not just about quality or size, as most people always seem to forget, choosing a camera or choosing a lens, it is also simply a personal style, a way to work. Having a static FoV changes a lot in the way you shoot, it can be limiting to one or revealing to another, just like a EVF vs OVF, or big ass camera vs small ass camera, etc etc, even if it’s just the way a subject responds to you, everything matters.

          Photo ‘quality’ is good no matter what we choose these days, it’s just one little aspect, we should really get over it and mind what’s *really* important.

      • Esa Tuunanen

        So what your physics tells about combining materials with different thermal expansion characteristics like iPhone’s glass and metal?

        Sure Apple has also good products but overall hype is only because of Steve Jobs’s gift of reality distortion field.

        • The reality distortion field worked on most.
          Steve Jobs methodology worked. The results are the proof.
          I am not an apple fan I have no apple products, my daughter uses Ipad2 and iphone, I use Galaxy 10.1 and Nokia.
          But the Jobs methodology worked. See the stock exchange.
          A class players together work. Lets see this on lenses.

  • Ryan

    I would love to see just a bunch of 1.7-F2 high quality, low cost primes(like the 45mm 1.8). Some pancakes and some not. Anything slower then 2.0 and might as well just have a zoom(besides tele primes)… 14mm pancake,17mm pancake,25mm pancake,40mm,60mm, 300mm F4 power ois.

  • pdc

    These “kitchen-sink” surveys are really not much help to anyone – manufacturer or consumer. A “qualified” survey by type of photography would be useful.
    In any event I have an interest in weather-proofed fast long telephoto. The 400/f4 is do-able, but the 300/f2 is a highly unlikely prospect, and yet it gets 5% interest (the big end of such a lens construct is 15cm in diameter, plus the lens barrel!). The cost would be phenomenal.

  • Beside lenses, GH3 or similar with excellent video mode from Olympus, made with metal sealed durable body, GPS, peaking manual focus, in body IS, (I know, Panasonic will never give us that), audio out for headphones and more battery autonomy.

    And a menu with clear options, such as “AVCHD 1080@25p 24mps” instead of HBR or FSH or the damn cofusing way they call it…

    • Ryan

      I agree PDC…..I only voted for stuff I would ACTUALLY buy. I could never afford a 300mm F2….Not alot of people could. Its kind of like sony’s 500mm F4 lens that they just dropped….the only reason they came out with that lens is to say they have it….they might sell….what…500 of them maybe…

      Any ways….for me…truth be told…im not going to buy a lens a grand or more, so i hope the 12-35 2.8 and 35-100 2.8 is less then $1000 each…

  • I’d love to see a 25mm f/2.8 weather-sealed tilt/shift, to pair with a similar 12mm f/2.8. I could live with just those two and a fast tele like 25-120mm f/2.

    I’d also like to see filter thread sizes no smaller than 52mm. I think 52mm could be the 77mm of the m4/3 world.

    Lastly – given how small the glass in the Pany 20/1.7 and the Oly 45/1.8 is, I don’t see why anything slower than f/2.8 is acceptable. In this small form factor, fast glass doesn’t have to be huge, and there’s a disadvantage of lacking shallow DoF that could be somewhat recovered by faster apertures. When a zoom lens is f/5.6 at the long end and diffraction begins killing the image quality at f/11, that means there’s only two stops of usable aperture. I’m surprised this is acceptable. “slow” lenses should be no slower than f/4 in my opinion, and “fast” zooms should be constant f/2 AT LEAST, if not f/1.4 if that’s possible.

  • Ru Elpser

    Where is the button for BIGGER SeNsor?

    • MJr

      Wrong forum dude.

  • Martin

    25/2,0 ultramacro lens with at least 3:1 magnification

  • Maley

    Why did so many vote for a 25mm f/1.8 low priced pancake ? We already got a 25mm f1.4 and a 20mm 1.7 pancake. Where is the use in another pancake with nearly the same focal length and same aperture ?

  • Admin: The idea of making this kind of list is great and the amount of people who have voted is very good, only the outcome right now may not be quite realistic if we think about what people actually will buy. Could it be possible that you send the list to someone at Olympus or Panasonic for a reality check? By this I mean a rough estimate of actual size and price of each lens. Those two parameters should be added to list. After this the list would change quite a bit in a new vote, I guess, but also be more realistic.

    • MJr

      Exactly. It’s more of a list that says what people think would be ‘cool’, but really have no idea of the difficulties like cost and size. Not to mention that just about everyone had the genius idea to just add ‘weather sealed’. Easy for us to say, how hard can it be to add seals, right? A lot more R&D in any case. I’m sure PanOly can render these fantasies into a few realistic concepts, it shows what we think is missing fairly well, but i doubt they’ll let us in on it any more than this list just- being in existence.

  • JF

    I would like a 12-50mm f/2.0 pancake, weather sealed, macro, tack sharp at all focals and apertures for 200 euros !
    WHAT ??? it is not possible ?? pfffffff

  • Just make a zoom with a constant aperture already for crying out loud!

  • Elf

    So very many unrealistic expectations here.

    • MJr

      Very much so. Guys at Oly and Pany must be laughing their ass off.

  • molikmolik

    the 50/200 2.8/3.5 !!!
    on my E-3 ,that s maybe the more versatile & useful lens I never had : sport, birds , proxi , portrait …It do all and so well (so sharp ) .

    I prefere it to the 12-60 , wich is not enough bright for the 4/3 ( dof is too long after 30 ) , I would prefere a 12-35 …

    give me that 50/200 and I will be ready to come in µ43 world

  • I still miss a 14-54 2.8-2.5 ;-)

  • And why not more people want a lens that goes up to 400mm? It would be nice to make pics of birds and other animals :-)

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.