1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Opinions on the rumoured new Olympus 12-100mm f4

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by robcee, Aug 1, 2016.

  1. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    Hey fellow m43 enthusiasts,

    what are your thoughts on the rumoured new Oly 12-100mm f4 lens to be debuted along with the 25mm f1.2 and 30mm f3.5 macro?

    I've been burned before by "super-zooms". They're rarely great, but often good enough for casual travel photography and walking around. At an effective 24-200mm, this would put this lens alongside some of the "classics", like the Ken Rockwell authorized Nikkor 18-200 of yesteryear. (insert sarcastic emoji here)

    seriously though, as a pro zoom with constant f4 aperture, this could be killer if it has decent rendering throughout the range. As an all-in-one, daytime lens, I'm kind of intrigued.

    also kind of interested in the 25mm f1.2 as a replacement for my PL25mm f1.4, but doubting it'll be sufficiently excellent to warrant replacement.

    what say you?
     
  2. Hypilein

    Hypilein Mu-43 Veteran

    292
    Mar 18, 2015
    I find it quite interesting. The current superzooms are all starting at 14mm which is a big no-no for me. That said, I will probably not buy one, considering I own the P35-100 and cover all my wide to normal needs with the P7-14 and P20. I just find that in the range from 14-35mm a lot of it can be done by just moving around. But as a weather sealed option for hiking and the likes it might just be the ultimate solution.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Let's be honest - f4 is not useful in low light, nor does it offer much in way of DOF control. So really there is not much benefit over f5.6. I'd rather they just made it f4-5.6 and compact. I fear a straight f4 is going to be pretty fat and heavy.

    12-100 seems like a massively useful range for travel. But not if they make it so big that I want to leave it home.
     
    • Agree Agree x 8
    • Like Like x 1
  4. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I like the idea of it, but need to see what it can do optically for the majority of the range. I like the "one lens" for certain situations, and weather sealing will be nice as well.

    Price will also be a factor - I think it might be out of the range of a lot of people upon initial launch.
    Hoping for the best, but planning on it to be adequate. Praying that Olympus puts my fears to rest.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
    I think it's an interesting proposition. 12mm at the wide end and constant f/4.0 aperture are certainly refreshing. Could be a great piece of kit for travel, hiking, etc.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  6. piggsy

    piggsy Mu-43 All-Pro

    Seems to be pretty much the forum wishlist lens? Better than kit lens quality - hopefully - contant aperture, f4 to make it reasonably small. My memory of it at least is of seeing a loooot of people asking for this exact thing for a long time on a lot of forums. Hopefully it turns out to be a good idea :D
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  7. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Why would it be massively big being an f4.0 lens in that range?
     
  8. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Was the 12-40 f2.8 lens "out of the range of a lot of people upon initial launch"?
     
  9. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Why wouldn't it be?

    The 12-60 has about half the range, is only f5.6 and is still nearly as big as the 12-40 f2.8. I'd expect it to be a lot bigger than a 12-60 f3.5-5.6, wouldn't you?

    Compact Camera Meter

    Yeah. Still is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    Too soon to have an opinion. There are already, 14-140, 14-150, with variable apertures, 35-100 2.8... It would have to be improved in some way....significantly better IQ, or smaller, or less expensive. Choice is always good though.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  11. robcee

    robcee Mu-43 Veteran

    289
    Jan 10, 2016
    Toronto
    Rob Campbell
    I think it'll have weather sealing. being a PRO lens.

    I too look forward to some optical tests, @Speedliner@Speedliner, @gryphon1911@gryphon1911.
     
  12. alex g

    alex g Mu-43 Top Veteran

    553
    Mar 30, 2016
    New York / Bath
    My money is — admittedly fairly riskily — on it being parfocal, to please videographers. I know that neither the 12-40 nor the 40-150 pro are parfocal, while from what I've read, the Panny 7-14 reportedly is. Given that a zoom lens which maintains focus as it zooms is a big plus for shooting video, and that Oly are apparently pushing the video features of the new E-M1, it might be a smart move on their part.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    You only get what you pay for. Sometimes you might get a good special price but high quality lenses don't come at budget prices (except something like the MZD45).
     
  14. PacNWMike

    PacNWMike Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 5, 2014
    Salish Sea
    guess?
    Sure liked the 12-60 but too big to travel.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2016
  15. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sure, I don't argue that. But it doesn't make the lens any more affordable.
     
  16. pake

    pake Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 14, 2010
    Finland
    Teemu
    Well, in Olympus' point of view, there's no point in making it an f/5.6 lens instead of f/4. They can't build an f/5.6 lens and call it PRO (unless it's a 600mm lens). And why PRO? That's where the money is. At least the financial reports back up the claim that Olympus has started to make more money with lenses/cameras AFTER they started releasing PRO lenses. (make more money = closing in on breaking even)

    I'd be intrigued by this 12-100mm lens but f/4 won't do it for me. I shoot a lot in poor lighting and let's face it, this is an outdoor lens. I'm already well covered in 12-150mm range so I'll do just fine without this lens but I can see it selling well enough.

    "I fear a straight f4 is going to be pretty fat and heavy." << My wife just bought the Pana 35-100mm f/2.8 and it is really lightweight and "tiny". If Pana can squeeze an f/2.8 to that smallish package, Olympus should be able to (at least in theory) keep the size tolerable too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    One of my most used 135 lenses was a 28-48mm f4.0 (an amazing lens), depending on size it's likely I would trade the 12-40mm for this. I don't really use the 12-40mm for f2.8.
     
  18. Gary5

    Gary5 Mu-43 Veteran

    310
    Jan 15, 2014
    Well I don't need it because I can easily carry two bodies with f2.8 lenses the same focal length range. But I admit, I rarely use apertures wider than f4.0 in that situation, which is always outdoors.
     
  19. cptobvious

    cptobvious Mu-43 Veteran

    239
    Jan 8, 2013
    I have yet to see a zoom above around 4x (around 3x or less is ideal) that didn't have a significantly compromised image outside of the center. Earlier this year I bought the Panasonic 14-140 II based on reciews that claimed it didn't perform like a superzoom but on par with 2 kit lenses, but mine performed exactly like a superzoom with the characteristic flaws.

    Maybe Olympus managed a technological breakthrough on a 8x design if they're branding this a PRO lens, but I'll wait to see all the technical reviews before I order one.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    Yes, when you look at the Olympus 12-40 and 40-150 PRO zooms, they're 3.33x and 3.75x respectively. A 12-100 is an 8.33x lens, much is MUCH more difficult to make it perform well across the focal range (although maybe that's another reason why it's an f/4, as it's easy to make a better performing lens when it doesn't have super wide apertures).

    Olympus has proven they can do excellent zooms in the past with the 12-60 f/2.8-4 (I own that lens and it's simply fantastic), but that was a larger lens that relied less on software corrections and more on optical corrections.

    Although I have no interest in this lens (I own a 12-60 SWD and 50-200 SWD that pair nicely with my two E-M1's), I will be interested to see how it performs optically.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1