1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Just read this info on FM

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by tdekany, Nov 20, 2012.

  1. tdekany

    tdekany Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 8, 2011
    Oregon
    Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 - FM Forums

     
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    An Oly 40-150mm 2.8 would be a dream lens for me on M43! I'd definitely pay a premium for that.
     
  3. hkpzee

    hkpzee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 5, 2011
    Hong Kong
    Patrick
    An Oly 40-150/2.8 would be nice, but until they confirm the following questions, I'd stick with the 35-100/2.8, which you can enjoy now, rather than waiting till some time next year:
    - is it weather-sealed?
    - how big is it?
    - is it internal zooming and focusing like the 35-100?
    - are the optical qualities better than the 35-100?
    - how much does it cost?

    IMHO, Panasonic has done pretty well with the 35-100, setting the bar pretty high. If Olympus can top it (which I am really hoping, especially in terms of optical qualities), it would be one incredible zoom lens!
     
  4. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    Personally I am hoping it's actually 2.8-4.0 and compact, rather than constant and monstrous.
     
  5. hkpzee

    hkpzee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 5, 2011
    Hong Kong
    Patrick
    While we are at it, I actually would've preferred a m4/3 version of the Zuiko 50-200/2.8-3.5 SWD. Just half the size of the 4/3 version would've been great! :biggrin:
     
  6. cookme

    cookme Mu-43 Regular

    139
    May 25, 2012

    Yeah... a 40-150 f/2.8 will be something to lust for, if its quality is in the ballpark as the two recent panny lenses. Weather seal should be a standard (I wish :tongue:) and internal zoom is a huge plus..
     
  7. toshiro

    toshiro Mu-43 Regular

    155
    Apr 3, 2012
    a 14-40 f2.8 makes perfect sense, Olympus can't relese a 12-40 f2.8 as it would kill 12 f2 sales

    BTW, I find a 300 f4 pretty useless unless used for birding and even for birding I find the 75-300 more suitable as it has great IQ even at 250mm and is far more flexible
     
  8. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    I don't think the little buddy is telling the truth. Can't see how a 300mm f/4 could be that short.
     
  9. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    They didn't say if the 75-300 was extended to the 300mm length :)