New Olympus Lens Roadmap

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,461
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Focus bracketing works with flash on the olympus line so long as you're happy with 1/50 eshutter, which (along with hires having the same limitation) is why I went with the em1-2 over the g9. If I have continuous good lighting I just switch to 60fps mode and rock the camera forwards a bit without using the proper 'focus bracketing' mode at all, and just assemble in post.

I have to say in general though, focus bracketing as a designated mode, in camera, is much less useful than I thought it would be. If you're using dead or motionless subjects it's going to be much more useful. For live bugs you're much better off having control of exactly when the shot happens yourself, all focus bracketing does is lock you into a thing you need to turn the camera off to stop shooting if the subject starts moving. Even with the 60mm+12.8 diopters where hand control of the depth of exact slices is pretty precarious, I'm still finding manual control and assembly to be much more useful for actually getting a useable shot.
 

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,461
Location
Brisbane, Australia
Now that's genius! :thumbup:
That's what I used to do with the E-P5, it's just a hell of a lot easier than having to press the shutter each time due to the shutter shock without 0sec/efcs :D

Hugely recommend something like fast raw viewer for this approach though, there's often not enough detail in the embedded jpg to tell if the shot is good or has coverage, and lightroom is wayyy too slow to flick through 100s of images with this.
 

archaeopteryx

Gambian sidling bush
Joined
Feb 25, 2017
Messages
1,264
Now that's genius!
There's a range of similar methods. A couple examples:
  • Bursts on the birds and mammals photographers more traditionally refer to as wildlife. In particular, I'm somewhat surprised there isn't more use of focus stacking to offset the shallow depth of field of long telephotos when critters are resting or moving predictably. Presumably those combining larger glass with larger critters than discussed here will make more routine use of the techniques eventually. Whilst macro and some forms of handheld high res rely on photographer motion the technology potential here seems more around controlled AF-C pumping.
  • Bursts with a more or less static camera and a plant swinging in the wind. This is harder for focus stacking as most stackers aren't great about handling subject translation and rotation, particularly if there's background detail. I suspect the software limitations will come away eventually---Helicon seems to have invested most in frame alignment which can handle such things, though Heribert's been pushing Picolay's alignment abilities of late---but for now it's more a special case thing.
Current bodies most all have 30 fps burst ability in the sense of shredding 8MP frames from 4k video (or 18MP with the GH5 and G9's 6k). If you can live with 2MP from 1080p there's usually also a 60 fps option. Panasonic (post focus) and Fuji (multi-focus) have pushed this more than others. Olympus and Nikon seem aware enough of bracketing maybe they'll do something eventually.

all focus bracketing does is lock you into a thing you need to turn the camera off to stop shooting if the subject starts moving
I think that's an industry wide limitation at the moment. At low magnification with their 240 "fps" lenses, Panasonic's depth pre-scan and image acquisition in post focus is quick enough to mitigate it fairly well due to the greater DoF and correspondingly lower of frames needed. That at least saves futzing around with setting a start depth, number of frames, and frame interval. The 45-175 isn't 240 fps marked but has comparable speed. The PL 45 macro's much slower. The 45-175 slows down with a lens in front of it as well as its complete focus throw usually works out to be about 330 frames, which necessarily takes 11 seconds at 30 fps.

Being on tripod I usually use a two second delay so, with the time it takes to decide to press the shutter release and depth scan, a macro stack with the 45-175 is basically a 15 second commitment. With plants it's not usually a big deal to wait it out and try again, but it's unclear why Panasonic didn't include some kind of cancel during the bracketing. One can cancel during the delay and can stop videos any time, so it's bizarre have to turn off the camera to halt a bracket.

Hugely recommend something like fast raw viewer for this approach though
Or work in jpeg, as such use cases are one of the classic reasons for doing so. ;) Jpeg's a corollary of extracting frames from 4k and 4k also happens to be an efficient way of reviewing frames. However, image viewers often aren't especially performant, even with only 8MP jpegs. I use Irfan in combination of direct folder arrangement and access, scripts, ffmpeg, multi-folder runs of Picolay, and GIMP with some sequencing to make efficient use of available processor cores. Not ideal, but it works fine and I expect if any greater software assist emerges it'll be because I've extended the scripts' abilities.
 
Last edited:

hoodlum

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
368
Location
Toronto Canada
New Olympus patent for 8-25 f4. This matches up exactly with the Wide Zoom lens under the PRO category in the lens roadmap.

https://asobinet.com/info-patent-oy-8-25mm-f4/

lens_roadmap_Jan_24_2019_OPR-rev.2.0.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

joerg218

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 25, 2015
Messages
652
Location
Koblenz, Germany
Real Name
Jörg

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,461
Location
Brisbane, Australia
There's a range of similar methods. A couple examples:
  • Bursts on the birds and mammals photographers more traditionally refer to as wildlife. In particular, I'm somewhat surprised there isn't more use of focus stacking to offset the shallow depth of field of long telephotos when critters are resting or moving predictably. Presumably those combining larger glass with larger critters than discussed here will make more routine use of the techniques eventually. Whilst macro and some forms of handheld high res rely on photographer motion the technology potential here seems more around controlled AF-C pumping.
 

pake

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Messages
2,004
Location
Finland
Real Name
Teemu

mawz

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
110
8-25/4 is just about ideal, if it's no heavier than the PL8-18 and is sealed (should be possible as that would be trading aperture for reach). Honestly, I'd have been happy with an 8-16/4, the extra reach is just gravy, an 8-25 is a weld to the body type lens for me.

I'm fine with f4, I want small/light more than f2.8.

Now gimme an f4 40-xxx tele and I'll be set.
 

mawz

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
110
I think it's going to be huge. Look at the optical formula from that patent - look at how long it is!
If it's huge, it's DOA thanks to the 10-25 being 2.5 stops faster. It needs to be much smaller than the 10-25 to justify f4
 

whumber

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
537
If it's huge, it's DOA thanks to the 10-25 being 2.5 stops faster. It needs to be much smaller than the 10-25 to justify f4
Seems like it should be similar in size to the 12-100, maybe a bit narrower. Seems like it would need to be much cheaper than the PL 10-25 to make any sense.
 

joerg218

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 25, 2015
Messages
652
Location
Koblenz, Germany
Real Name
Jörg
Seems like it should be similar in size to the 12-100, maybe a bit narrower. Seems like it would need to be much cheaper than the PL 10-25 to make any sense.
And in a price range of the Pana Leica 8-18. But the 2.8 of the Pana Leica would be much better... Ok, Olympus has to sell it for 499$/499€ :D
 

mawz

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
110
And in a price range of the Pana Leica 8-18. But the 2.8 of the Pana Leica would be much better... Ok, Olympus has to sell it for 499$/499€ :D
The extra reach of the 8-25 would make up for the extra speed lost vs the PL.

That said, it needs to be the size of the PL, and preferably around the price of it as well. If it's huge, as has been suggested, it is dead. If it's more money than the PL, it's dead.
 

hoodlum

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
368
Location
Toronto Canada
Sure, but 10-25 is like $1800. I would presume this to be closer to $1000 - and it would have to be lighter as an f4.
I came across this interview from earlier this year that suggests we will see multiple PRO lenses released before they announce the 150-400 in 2020.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2019/03/04/olympus-qa-cpplus-2019-finally-why-e-m5-iii-running-late-why-not-to-worry

As we have shown in our lens roadmap, Olympus has already focused on three points. First, enriching the telephoto shooting lens for all users from professional to entry users, by taking advantage of Micro Four Thirds characteristics. Second, to develop high-speed prime lenses for professionals and high amateurs. Third, to enrich zoom lenses in the pro category that only Micro Four Thirds can offer. We try to develop several lenses every year. Of course, there will be pro lenses released before the 150-400mm pro launch in 2020. Please be on the lookout for more information for what's coming. But I say again, we launch new lenses every year.
 

JonSnih

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
132
Location
CZE
I came across this interview from earlier this year that suggests we will see multiple PRO lenses released before they announce the 150-400 in 2020.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2019/03/04/olympus-qa-cpplus-2019-finally-why-e-m5-iii-running-late-why-not-to-worry

As we have shown in our lens roadmap, Olympus has already focused on three points. First, enriching the telephoto shooting lens for all users from professional to entry users, by taking advantage of Micro Four Thirds characteristics. Second, to develop high-speed prime lenses for professionals and high amateurs. Third, to enrich zoom lenses in the pro category that only Micro Four Thirds can offer. We try to develop several lenses every year. Of course, there will be pro lenses released before the 150-400mm pro launch in 2020. Please be on the lookout for more information for what's coming. But I say again, we launch new lenses every year.
This is what they said in early March 2019. I suppose they will prioritize the 150-400mm lens which should come out in Q1 2020. I still hope that Oly will release at least one tele zoom which is more on a compact side, namely a 50-200mm F4.0 or thereabouts.
 

dhazeghi

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
4,377
Location
San Jose, CA
Real Name
Dara
This is what they said in early March 2019. I suppose they will prioritize the 150-400mm lens which should come out in Q1 2020. I still hope that Oly will release at least one tele zoom which is more on a compact side, namely a 50-200mm F4.0 or thereabouts.
This has been a remarkably quiet year for lens releases from Olympus. The 12-200 and ... that's it? Panasonic's done a bit better I think, but the only truly 'new' design is the 10-25/1.7. Everything else just seems to be updates on existing models.
 

pcr1040

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
237
As a long time M43 user, I would like add my 2 cent to this group discussion. I currently shoot wildlife with a Pana G9 and Pana's 100-400 lens. And IMHO, the sweet spot for M43 is with long lenses that are easily carried AND hand held. If I wanted to drag around a Tripod, I would switch to my FF Sony A7r3 and buy their new humongous 200-600mm zoom that, by all reports offers excellent crisp sharp images at 600mm. The advantage of M43 is size and portability and so I am stuck with the M43 system for my wildlife shooting. I have been disappointment with the two versions of the Pana 100-400 I had. Neither one generated really sharp images above 300mm extension. I hate to say it, but the IQ at 350 to 400 is so poor that I seldom rack the lens out to that extension. And the purpose of a long zoom is to be able to shoot crisp sharp images at the long end of the extension range. IMHO, Panasonic made a mistake in the design of this lens. It was optimized for the shorter range, not the longest range. And at the short end to middle range, the lens is produces excellent images, But why carry around a 400mm lens when you are shooting at no more than 250 to 300mm for sharp results. I would hope the forthcoming Olympus 150-400 is not so optimized for the shorter and mid range. I like the idea that Olympus has a built in TC so I will be looking at this as a substitute for the current Pana 100-400 lens in my lens cabinet.
Finally, my personal interest in short and WA lenses for the m43 are close to zero. If I am shooting landscapes or street scenes, I much prefer to take them with a FF sensor that leaves me with a higher quality image that I can crop without losing the ability to make large prints. As I said earlier, the M43 system is at its best for portability. But today, FF digital cameras like the Sony A7R3 are in fact smaller than my Panasonic G9. And while the G9 is IMHO, one of the very best cameras I have ever used from a feature functionality point of view, it is sensor size limited. So for standard lenses and WA, why would I sacrifice dynamic range and higher quality RAW FF image files? One the other hand, when it comes to portability WITH long lenses, IMHO, M43 really shines. As for me, it is all about picking the right tool for the job at hand.
 
Last edited:
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom