Panasonic Interview - Talk of New Primes & GH2

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by john1027, Jun 3, 2010.

  1. john1027

    john1027 Mu-43 Veteran

    305
    Mar 5, 2010
    Alexandria, VA USA
  2. kwaphoto

    kwaphoto Mu-43 Regular

    55
    Jun 4, 2010
    Colorado, USA
    Primes would be welcome! I'd love something like a 14 f/2.8; 25 f/1.4; 50 f/1.8 and 70 f/2
     
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Great to hear a Panasonic executive saying that they hear what their customers want and will be bringing out more fast primes. A fast short tele portrait lens can't be far off now.
     
  4. photoSmart42

    photoSmart42 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    628
    Feb 12, 2010
    San Diego, CA
    Sounds like they're focusing on the video capabilities of the next generation GH model, but nothing about the still photo capability. I'm not sure the two are related, but hopefully they'll do something to improve the stills as well. Either that, or come out with a semi-pro version of the GH separately with improved stills capability and not such emphasis on HD video.
     
  5. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    why do ppl assume the GF2 will have a built in EVF because they aren't making a new EVF for the GF1? Who's to say they'll use a different connector for higher bandwidth? Maybe that's a limitation in the GF1 design. Or maybe they can't make it backwards compatible for some technical reason.

    But regardless, I want to know what primes, and when. We still haven't seen a 14/2.8 we were promised, no?
     
  6. Jamus

    Jamus Mu-43 Regular

    128
    Apr 18, 2010
    Just give us a damn 20-28mm equivalent already!
    Those are my favorite. :p
     
  7. igi

    igi Mu-43 Regular

    111
    Feb 24, 2010
    ... and make it fast! (in both literal and photographic sense of the word):wink:
     
  8. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    I would love to see a 12/2.8 pancake. It's what the 14/2.8 should have been. I'd would let that slide if they came out w/ a 12/1.4 that was at most twice the size of the 20/1.7, while still not being too much more expensive, assuming excellent wide open shots.