Updated Olympus lens road map - 8-25mm f4, finally a pro macro, ... does it make you want to stick with Olympus?

wes camino

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
19
Real Name
wes camino
My first M43 camera is my favorite and I still have it, the PM2. For size and shape it has no competition and it is the same sensor as the OM-D5 which suits me fine. I prefer prime lenses, so promises of a newer, longer zoom do not interest me. Even the kit lens did not impress me. More happy with the Pany 14 and 20mm pancake lenses, and the Oly 25 and 45mm lenses. It saddens me to see Olympus dump its imaging system. And, I don't think Panasonic will improve the system much; only maintaining it for now. So, I have been looking at what Sony, Fujifilm, and Canon M has to offer. But, I have some doubts that these makers will maintain their smaller, lighter bodies for long as well. Full frame is just so much the future, right now. Am just sort of confused and unsure how to get past all of this at the moment. May be just best to chuck it all and go for a good smartphone camera, instead. That's the trend which seems to have no doubt of a future.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
1,103
Location
Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Olympus has AT LEAST till the end of the year to get those on the market. The new management/owners/decision-makers won't have a say until the shares have been transferred etc.

I feel people are panicking/stressing out way too much about this "what MIGHT happen in the future" thing. Stop worrying and live it day by day. Not more you can do about it anyway, right?
JIP effectively does have a say once the Memorandum was released. These documents usually apply liability to added costs or liabilities being in or out of the tent, so to speak. For long glass this will apply to warranty and servicing coverage, retail stock, etc. There is likely no Olympus Imaging announcement going forward that JIP isn’t consulted on, and perhaps has a veto over. That’s the whole point of replacing existing Imaging management with new management.
 

getoutandshoot

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
146
Location
SF Bay area, CA
Real Name
Dave
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #65
JIP effectively does have a say once the Memorandum was released. These documents usually apply liability to added costs or liabilities being in or out of the tent, so to speak. For long glass this will apply to warranty and servicing coverage, retail stock, etc. There is likely no Olympus Imaging announcement going forward that JIP isn’t consulted on, and perhaps has a veto over. That’s the whole point of replacing existing Imaging management with new management.
Yes, and there are several future lenses that have been on the current road map for a while now with no announced release date. I have to believe many of them will now never become real...

As many have said before, there are some future lenses on the top "Pro" part of the road map that really don't make much sense. For example the 2 "Telephoto Zoom Lenses" that have nearly identical focal ranges... both appear to overlap by more than 1/2 with the existing 40-150 f/2.8. Then there are the future "Bright Prime Lenses" that appear to be in the exact same focal length territory as the 3 excellent bright Pro primes they already completed not that long ago... I mean sure, maybe make some that are less big/expensive, but why not just upgrade some of the older non-Pro primes (all of which are "bright," ~f/2 or f/2.8)?

On the other hand, the 2 new lenses just announced (8-25 f/4 and ~100 macro) do make more sense; these are lenses more current micro-4/3 users would actually vote for (IMO). So I hope Olympus and/or JIP will put a higher priority on these 2 lenses. Hopefully that is why they were announced now (maybe with JIP's blessing?).

Dave
 

doady

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
71
As many have said before, there are some future lenses on the top "Pro" part of the road map that really don't make much sense. For example the 2 "Telephoto Zoom Lenses" that have nearly identical focal ranges... both appear to overlap by more than 1/2 with the existing 40-150 f/2.8.
The 50-200mm is grouped with the F2.8 lenses, on the same line as the 7-14mm F2.8. The 50-250mm is grouped with the F4 lenses, on the same line as the 12-45mm F4. So the 50-200mm is probably larger and F2.8 while the 50-250mm is probably smaller and F4.

Then there are the future "Bright Prime Lenses" that appear to be in the exact same focal length territory as the 3 excellent bright Pro primes they already completed not that long ago... I mean sure, maybe make some that are less big/expensive, but why not just upgrade some of the older non-Pro primes (all of which are "bright," ~f/2 or f/2.8)?
How is that 10mm to 55mm range already completed? No need for 10mm F1.4 or 12mm F1.4?
 

piggsy

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
1,557
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I'm sure you'll be delighted with the available options. Please be sure to let us know what you buy.
It's a worthwhile consideration, if I was JIP I'd ask an internal group to find the largest possible sensor size that works with the majority of highest margin/best selling lenses on the m43 platform, that can possibly be massaged to work with lens correction. Maybe do a 1:1 sensor with it.

Alternatively: come out with something genuinely big sensor wise, around what is called "medium format" in digital, then come out with some very simple yet good reworked 3-5 element lenses, push software correction for them as much as possible, deliver maximum image quality and margin over manufacturing costs.
 

getoutandshoot

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
146
Location
SF Bay area, CA
Real Name
Dave
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #69
The 50-200mm is grouped with the F2.8 lenses, on the same line as the 7-14mm F2.8. The 50-250mm is grouped with the F4 lenses, on the same line as the 12-45mm F4. So the 50-200mm is probably larger and F2.8 while the 50-250mm is probably smaller and F4.

How is that 10mm to 55mm range already completed? No need for 10mm F1.4 or 12mm F1.4?
Ok, I can see some people would want a 50-200 or 50-250 in the line up, and maybe even an expensive f/2.8 one and a less expensive one at f/4. I guess that would be a popular choice for sports photographers. I wouldn't be interested in such a lens myself, but maybe there are lots of folks who really want it. What do I know.

I'm not saying the range of "bright primes" from 10-55mm is "completed," but it's pretty well filled out, especially if you include the non-pro lenses with a maximum aperture of f/2 or brighter. I am totally in agreement that it would be great to see a 10mm prime (10mm is on the very far edge of that vague "bright prime" band on the map). A new pro 12mm prime would be fine, but on lenses this wide in the micro-4/3 system, I really would rather see them with a maximum aperture of f/2 or f/2.8 to keep the size smaller and cost lower, but again, that's just me.

Dave
 

doady

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
71
Ok, I can see some people would want a 50-200 or 50-250 in the line up, and maybe even an expensive f/2.8 one and a less expensive one at f/4. I guess that would be a popular choice for sports photographers. I wouldn't be interested in such a lens myself, but maybe there are lots of folks who really want it. What do I know.
I am not a sports or wildlife photographer but I have 12-100mm F4 so either one 50-200mm or 50-250mm would be much better complement to it than 40-150mm F2.8. Maybe Olympus is thinking about me.

40-150mm F2.8 does not have IS either so maybe IS will be another differentiating feature between 50-200mm or 50-250mm besides max aperture, or maybe both will have it to differentiate them from 40-150mm F2.8.


I'm not saying the range of "bright primes" from 10-55mm is "completed," but it's pretty well filled out, especially if you include the non-pro lenses with a maximum aperture of f/2 or brighter. I am totally in agreement that it would be great to see a 10mm prime (10mm is on the very far edge of that vague "bright prime" band on the map). A new pro 12mm prime would be fine, but on lenses this wide in the micro-4/3 system, I really would rather see them with a maximum aperture of f/2 or f/2.8 to keep the size smaller and cost lower, but again, that's just me.

Dave
I don't think a "bright" Pro 12mm prime would be same aperture or darker than the non-Pro 12mm F2.

I really think a 10mm and 12mm Pro would fill in a big gap in the lineup. With F1.4, they would complement the existing F1.2 primes better. A 7mm F1.8 Pro is not on the map but that would be great too.

They need small and compact, but they also need medium or large size bright lenses too. I'm glad they are finally making smaller Pro lenses to fit the E-M5 series, because that was the major gap when I was trying out E-M5 III and I ended up not getting the camera because of it. The 12-40mm F2.8 was just too big and heavy for that body, so I ended up getting E-M1 II with 12-100mm F4 instead. E-M1 II is little too much for me, but I had no choice at the time. So they need to make smaller lenses, but they cannot ignore E-M1 and E-M1X series either. I am E-M1 series user now for better or worse, they cannot forget about me, right?

Eventually they will need to make F1.8 and F2 Pro primes to complement the new and upcoming F4 Pro zooms, but they still need to make more F1.2 and F1.4 primes to complement the F2.8 zooms as well.
 

Stanga

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
1,271
Some of the requests mentioned here are what we Dutch call zandkastelen. A 50-200m f2.8 would be a costly lens on its own. A pro version even more so. And the more expensive these lenses are, the smaller the number of sales. A 50-200mm would have to be compatible with the 1.4 and 2.0 converters. And that then exposes the 70-300mm and 100-400mm to competition for the same wallets.
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,420
Location
New England
Some of the requests mentioned here are what we Dutch call zandkastelen. A 50-200m f2.8 would be a costly lens on its own. A pro version even more so. And the more expensive these lenses are, the smaller the number of sales. A 50-200mm would have to be compatible with the 1.4 and 2.0 converters. And that then exposes the 70-300mm and 100-400mm to competition for the same wallets.
Sounds like you are talking about the old 4/3rds days. The 50-200mm was not constant aperture but did start at f2.8, only closed down 2/3rds a stop, was weather/dust resistant, was compatible with the 1.4x and 2.0x converters at the time, and existed along side the Oly 70-300. Basically just about everything you said has already happened before with Oly. :whistling:
 

Stanga

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
1,271
Sounds like you are talking about the old 4/3rds days. The 50-200mm was not constant aperture but did start at f2.8, only closed down 2/3rds a stop, was weather/dust resistant, was compatible with the 1.4x and 2.0x converters at the time, and existed along side the Oly 70-300. Basically just about everything you said has already happened before with Oly. :whistling:
There is already the PL50-200mm f2.8/4.0. So the Olympus would have to go one better and have a constant aperture.
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,420
Location
New England
There is already the PL50-200mm f2.8/4.0. So the Olympus would have to go one better and have a constant aperture.
I don't think Oly really cares as much as people think about what Panasonic releases and vice versa. They have and continue to release like lenses and both companies are more likely to think about what is missing from their own line up.

I doubt they would do a 50-200 in constant aperture of f2.8. It would just be too big. Front filter would probably have to be at least 77mm. It would make more sense to copy the 2.8-3.5 design, which is bragging rights faster (but likely not realistically faster) than Panny, and have the more reasonable 67mm filter on front.

But do not discount other features that would make the Oly version more attractive to an Oly user such as Sync-IS (just like the Panny version would appeal to Panny users for the Dual IS), having a L-Fn button, and weathersealing that is known to match up properly with an Oly body (again that one goes for Panny lenses with Panny bodies as well). All camera companies know most of their customers have a lot of brand loyalty and when looking for a particular lens they will almost always start with the same brand lens as their camera in their search.
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,806
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
My issue with a 50-200/2.8 is that it leaves an even bigger hole, for a smaller/lighter lens.
Some times, size and weight are an issue.
Even with the smaller 40-150/2.8, I am thinking about getting the Panasonic 35-100/2.8, as a smaller/lighter companion lens.
 

Keeth101

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
448
Olympus cameras, particularly the EM1ii, and their lenses make me want to stick with Olympus!
That's it, no more, no less.
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
3,420
Location
New England
Some times, size and weight are an issue.
Even with the smaller 40-150/2.8, I am thinking about getting the Panasonic 35-100/2.8, as a smaller/lighter companion lens.
In that case, trump them all with the 40-150 "R". In terms of size and weight this one is the heavy weight champion (pun intended). And during good lighting the IQ of this lens is very great.
 

John King

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
812
Location
Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
In that case, trump them all with the 40-150 "R". In terms of size and weight this one is the heavy weight champion (pun intended). And during good lighting the IQ of this lens is very great.
Yup.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,806
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
In that case, trump them all with the 40-150 "R". In terms of size and weight this one is the heavy weight champion (pun intended). And during good lighting the IQ of this lens is very great.
I have the 40-150R :biggrin:
And yes it is a GREAT small/light tele-zoom, for day time.
I once tried to shoot a night football game with the 40-150R :( It was just too slow.

The 35-100/2.8 and the 40-150/2.8 are for when the light goes down.
 

doady

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
71
My issue with a 50-200/2.8 is that it leaves an even bigger hole, for a smaller/lighter lens.
Some times, size and weight are an issue.
Even with the smaller 40-150/2.8, I am thinking about getting the Panasonic 35-100/2.8, as a smaller/lighter companion lens.
There is another lens with similar focal range grouped with the other new/upcoming compact F4 lenses, so likely it will be F4 too.

Someone wondered why have both a 50-200mm and a 50-230mm upcoming, and I think F2.8 vs F4 must be the reason.

It is interesting so many upcoming Pro lenses, mostly telephoto, but only one non-Pro, which is super-telephoto. Maybe Olympus trying hard to distance the system from smartphones. Telephoto might be an advantage of Micro Four Thirds over full frame too.
 
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