Six New Panasonic Lens Patents

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by ijm5012, Aug 2, 2016.

  1. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    New Panasonic MFT zoom patents: Impressive 12-240mm MFT superzoom! - 43 Rumors

    This obviously has to be taken with a grain of salt, because there are MANY lens patents that get filed and never see the light of day, but I thought this was interesting none the less:
    • 12-70mm f/2.8
    • 12-240mm f/3.6-6.5 (lens length 188 mm / 7.5 in)
    • 24-70mm f/3.6-5.7
    • 24-240mm f/3.6-6.5
    • 70-200mm f/2.8
    • 100-300mm f/2.8-4.0
    The two lenses that start at 24mm really are of no interest on a m43 camera, as it starts at 35mm equiv. FoV. It is interesting though of those lenses are built to cover a FF sensor. Panasonic has beating their chest about wanting 8K in their cameras, but there are many skeptics out there who think this can't be done on a sensor as small as m43. Maybe they're starting to look at a FF design/lenses, just like how Olympus has been patenting FF lens designs? Who knows...

    Then there's a 12-240mm lens that's clearly designed for m43, an impressive 20x zoom that will almost certainly results in garbage IQ. It's also huge, at 188mm / 7.5in long, and pretty slow throughout at f/3.6-6.5.

    The 12-70 & 70-200 f/2.8 seem interesting, basically a modern-day equivalent to the 12-60 SWD and 50-200 SWD. The problem is that those lenses were f/2.8-4 and f/2.8-3.5 respectively, and may people felt those lenses are far too large for m43 (I disagree, as I own and use both on my two E-M1 bodies and love them). A constant f/2.8 design would be even larger and heavier.

    The one lens that is quite interesting is the 100-300 f/2.8-4. This seems to be a lens many people were clamoring for as an update to current 100-300, when we instead received the PanaLeica 100-400. While the PanaLeica is a good lens, there are still people who say it's too big. Maybe a 100-300 f/2.8-4 will come in being a little smaller, while also being a stop faster across the range?
     
  2. davidedric

    davidedric Mu-43 Regular

    81
    Nov 24, 2013
    Cheshire, UK
    Dave
    I agree strongly about the 100-300. That sounds like exactly what I was looking for - obviously depending on what it actually delivers.
    Can I have it for Christmas, please? OK, I guess it's which Christmas.

    Dave
     
  3. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Some of those might be for Leica. They seem like FF lengths.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. astrostl

    astrostl Mu-43 Veteran

    360
    Oct 4, 2014
    St. Louis, MO
    Justin Honold
    Definitely in for the 100-300.
     
  5. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The Sigma 100-300 f4 is 227x92mm, which is essentially the same size as the Olympus 300mm f4. Both are about 1300g. I can't imagine it could get any smaller or lighter being a zoom and starting a stop faster than the Sigma. So I think that's your minimum size and weight right right there.
     
  6. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    24-70mm on mu-43 would be useful to me for some indoor events, but it'd have to be much faster than that.

    12-70/2.8 would also be very useful.

    I'm wondering if the super zooms are for fixed-lens compacts... are they collapsing?

    Barry
     
  7. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    This.
     
  8. budeny

    budeny Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 4, 2014
    Boulder, CO
    I'd rather have 9-35mm/f4.0
     
  9. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    Not certain that's relevant, given that it wasn't part of the six lenses mentioned in the OP.

    This isn't a "lens wishlist" thread, as there are plenty of those floating around. I intended on having this thread stay on topic and discuss the possibilities of the aforementioned lenses.

    I don't intend to sound rude, but I really hate it how nearly every thread on some kind of rumor deviates from its intended topic.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I just think that starting a 24mm is so odd for a m43 lens. Hell, I thought the 18-180 superzoom from the 4/3 days was odd, considering it started at a 36mm eqv. FoV, so a 24mm is even more odd given that it starts at 48mm and ends at 140mm eqv. FoV.

    As for the super zooms, those focal lengths don't make sense on any other sensor size other than m43. 12mm on a 1" sensor is 32mm eqv. FoV.
     
  11. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    "Not certain that's relevant, given that it wasn't part of the six lenses mentioned in the OP."
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. DanS

    DanS Mu-43 Veteran

    393
    Mar 8, 2016
    Central IL
    I originally though the 12-70 and 70-200 might be replacements for the 12-35 & 35-100 "X" pro line, but then 100-300 makes no sense.

    Would they do two pro lines at the same time?

    New:
    • 12-70 f/2.8
    • 70-200 f/2.8
    Old:
    • 12-35 f/2.8
    • 35-100 f/2.8
    • 100-300 f/2.8-4.0

    To me this sounds like a better pro line:
    • 12-70 f/2.8
    • 70-200 f/2.8
    • 200-400 f/2.8-4.0
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    While cute and funny, your post seems intentionally neglect my prior sentence, when I said that having a zoom lens which starts at 24mm on a m43 sensor would be odd. My reference to the 18-180 was simply for reference. It wasn't a post stating "I want/need a lens that covers this focal range", as you tried to construe.

    I must say though, with how you neglected other pertinent information from my post in order to make my words fit your agenda, I wonder if you work for a news agency here in the US. They're always spinning other people's words against them to suit a certain view on the subject at hand.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I had initially thought that as well (like a modern-day 12-60 & 50-200 SWD), but the problem with that is those lenses were variable aperture (we'll say f/2.8-4 for argument's sake), where these rumored lenses are a constant f/2.8, which would make them HUGE!

    A 70-200mm f/2.8 for m43 should in theory be essentially the same size as a 70-200 f/2.8 for full frame (the lens may be a bit smaller to cover the smaller image circle, but not drastically so).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. acnomad

    acnomad Mu-43 Veteran

    284
    Jan 5, 2016
    Andy
    That would indeed be a terrific PRO line, but I doubt they'd risk cannibalizing sales on the 100-400. Seems to me that just the 12-70 and 70-200 make a great combo as a two-zoom MFT kit. If the IQ on the P70-200 is anything like the Canikon FF offerings in a compact barrel, I'd be very interested.
     
  16. DanS

    DanS Mu-43 Veteran

    393
    Mar 8, 2016
    Central IL
    We do have some big lenses in the system already though.

    Oly 12-40 : 70mm x 84mm
    Oly 40-150 : 79mm x 160mm

    The SWDs for compariosn
    12-60 : 79.5mm x 98.5mm
    50-200 : 86.5mm x 157mm

    I'm not sure it would cannibalize it, 200-400mm f/2.8-4.0 would most likely be substantially more expensive. I could easily see it being 2 or 3 times more expensive.
     
  17. Hypilein

    Hypilein Mu-43 Veteran

    292
    Mar 18, 2015
    Yes, size seems to be the primary problem here. All of these lenses would most certainly be to big for me. But panasonic has the compact zooms (the P35-100 2.8 is tiny for what it is) already fleshed out, so I guess this would be ok. Some people don't mind the size, and a 70-200 2.8 would certainly be a nice lens.
     
  18. DanS

    DanS Mu-43 Veteran

    393
    Mar 8, 2016
    Central IL
    it could potentially be a true pro line!

    By that I mean image quality being the only thing that matters, in the same vein as the Nocticron ($1600 74mm x 77mm 425g).
     
  19. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    It would certainly be nice to see Panasonic come out with a true Pro line as Olympus has done. I know this is going to catch a lot of crap but I really don't consider the Panny 35-100 a Pro lens. Sure it has constant ƒ2.8 and is weather sealed, but the motors in it don't seem as fast at CAF as the Olympus Pro lenses. Those fast motors are one of the things that makes the Olympus lenses larger then their Panny counterparts. I am not saying the Panny 35-100 is a terrible lens, it is actually pretty good and I have considered it as a travel lens because of it's small size and great IQ (but not sure I would use it over the Olympus 40-150 for sports).
     
  20. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    The 35-100f2.8 is a great lens. My comparison would be the 75f1.8 which is one of the best m43 lenses and the 35-100 is certainly not far off. The 12-35 is just as good or better depending on your needs as the 12-40.