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

[ac12]

That's why I like mine and keep it. I doubt the rumored 8-25 f4 Pro will be small and light. I hope smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the 7-14 f2.8 Pro or PL 8-18 f2.8-4 though. (weather-sealed too)

While I want the 8-25, I have your reservation as well. How big/heavy will it be? And what is the cost?
As I get older, I don't want to / cannot carry the kit weight I used to.

 

[Holoholo55]

Well, the O9-18mm F4-5.6 is already $699 (consumer grade lens), the new O8-25mm F4 (Pro lens) is heading higher, I guess. The main competitor the PL8-18mm F2.8-4 is not cheap as well - $1099. But I like your pricing policy!

I always thought the M.Zuiko 9-18 f4-5.6 was overpriced at $699 retail, especially because it's one of the earliest zoom lenses for Olympus MFT, dating back to 2010. Olympus has not updated nor replaced it since, nor has it dropped the price. I didn't buy one until I found an Oly refurbed one for $399. I thought that was a fair price. It's a big jump from that to a 7-14 Pro or PL 8-18. I still like it for a number of reasons.

 

[Dogbert62]

The Oly 9-18mm is by far my most used UWA lens... it checks many of the boxes I want in this class of lens... Just hoping/wishing the 8-25mm would check a few more.. If it doesn’t? Oh well.... the hunt was fun

Dogbert

 

[doady]

I'd prefer an ultra-wide that is a bright prime to complement my 12-100mm, but 8-25mm would be a very interesting range for all sorts of urban photography. 8-12mm would be very useful for architecture and cityscapes, and I rarely go past 25mm for these kind of photos anyways, so 8-25mm would actually be more versatile than my 12-100mm for urban photos, even retaining the constant max aperture. If the price for such versatility is not too high - not too much larger and more expensive than 12-45mm, and avoiding the bulging front element and lack of filter threads of 7-14mm - then it might be a good option for me. But of course, if the price is too low, then it might not be a good option either.

 

[Moula]

I doubt the rumored 8-25 f4 Pro will be small and light. I hope smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the 7-14 f2.8 Pro or PL 8-18 f2.8-4 though. (weather-sealed too)

It's announced as PRO, so it's virtually certain it'll be weather sealed. But size, weight and price are questionable. I hope for something in between 12-45/4 and 12-40/2.8 in all three parameters.

And hopefully as a kit with E-M5-III?

 

[Holoholo55]

It's announced as PRO, so it's virtually certain it'll be weather sealed. But size, weight and price are questionable. I hope for something in between 12-45/4 and 12-40/2.8 in all three parameters.

Yes, I realize that my comment about weather-sealing was superfluous. But, if it is as you hope, I'd go for that! https://camerasize.com/compact/#692.852,692.412,692.659,ha,t

 

[Mike Wingate]

Why would a f4 zoom be larger than a f1.7 zoom of similar focal length?

Well Olympus Pro lenses are generally large affairs with a large filter size. The new O100-400 is larger than the Panasonic. F4 lenses, well the O pro 300 is a beast. We shall wait and see.

 

[PeeBee]

Well Olympus Pro lenses are generally large affairs with a large filter size. The new O100-400 is larger than the Panasonic. F4 lenses, well the O pro 300 is a beast. We shall wait and see.

The O100-400 is larger than the Panasonic because it's based on a Sigma full frame design. The 300 f4 is large because it's 300mm and f4. I may be proven wrong, but I can't see why it would need to be as big as the P10-25 f1.7

 

[JonSnih]

the new 8-25mm can't cost more than the 7-14 pro, right? i need a weather-sealed pro wide angle zoom to walk about.

Right. The F4 zoom line-up should be a poor man's F2.8s. The 12-45mm F4 is $650, the 8-25mm F4 will be in $750-899 price range - says my crystal ball.

 

[caonidayeah]

Right. The F4 zoom line-up should be a poor man's F2.8s. The 12-45mm F4 is $650, the 8-25mm F4 will be in $750-899 price range - says my crystal ball.

not necessarily poor man's choices. with my 12-45 F4, I pretty much don't have to step down aperture for what I do. I'm happy to trade aperture with weight/size. Don't see myself getting a 12-40 F2.8. will get 40-150 F2.8 instead.

 

[Aristophanes]

Right. The F4 zoom line-up should be a poor man's F2.8s. The 12-45mm F4 is $650, the 8-25mm F4 will be in $750-899 price range - says my crystal ball.

f/4 isn't necessarily "poor man's" choice. One could get an 8-25/12-100 f/4 and then the 100-400 for exclusively outdoor shooting (or flash-centred) in a versatile, compact package for the reach. They could then skip the larger, heavier f/2.8s and go to the f/1.2s for isolating shots.

That's when f/2.8s look to be the compromise.

 

[doady]

not necessarily poor man's choices. with my 12-45 F4, I pretty much don't have to step down aperture for what I do. I'm happy to trade aperture with weight/size. Don't see myself getting a 12-40 F2.8. will get 40-150 F2.8 instead.

What about 40-150mm F4? Or 50-230mm F4?

I wonder if these lenses will have IS. That make them even better than the current F2.8 version for some people.

If 50-200mm F2.8 has IS as well, then 40-150mm F2.8 could become a hard sell.

 

[Dave Black]

f/4 isn't necessarily "poor man's" choice. One could get an 8-25/12-100 f/4 and then the 100-400 for exclusively outdoor shooting (or flash-centred) in a versatile, compact package for the reach. They could then skip the larger, heavier f/2.8s and go to the f/1.2s for isolating shots.

That's when f/2.8s look to be the compromise.

My general out in nature and wildlife kit is now the 12-100/4.0 and the 100-400/5.0-6.3 zoom lenses, the 60/2.8 Macro and the 25/1.2. A great hiking kit. I do wish there was a fast 9 or 10mm prime. Just something wider than 12mm on the 12-100 zoom.

 

[Baenwort]

My general out in nature and wildlife kit is now the 12-100/4.0 and the 100-400/5.0-6.3 zoom lenses, the 60/2.8 Macro and the 25/1.2. A great hiking kit. I do wish there was a fast 9 or 10mm prime. Just something wider than 12mm on the 12-100 zoom.

Does the Olympus 8mm f1.8 Pro not work for you?

With the built in defish in the newer bodies it is kind nice.

Or if you don't want to defish you could get the Kowa 8.5mm f2.8 which has some nice photos here on the fora.

 

[Angus Gibbins]

With the built in defish in the newer bodies it is kind nice.

Only works in JPEGs though. Doesn't defish RAW

 

[PakkyT]

Only works in JPEGs though. Doesn't defish RAW

Olympus Workspace should be able to do it as well?

 

[Angus Gibbins]

Olympus Workspace should be able to do it as well?

Dunno. I don't use it.

 

[Danny_SWE]

larger I was hoping for a more compact wide angle zoom.
If the 12-45/4 transformed magically to 10-35/4 with same size/weight that would be my dream

jesus, I just noticed Panasonic S-system has a 20-60/3.5-5.6. Nice

 

[Baenwort]

Only works in JPEGs though. Doesn't defish RAW

True, but if one is working with the RAW they likely want to use a more customized defish process just as they are using a more custom approach to the color, sharpening, and noise reduction.

The jpg means you see it in the view finder well enough to compose and for faster posting it does well enough when you would use jpgs anyway.

The alternative is a fast wide and no need for any straightening Kowa. You just have to live with the MF. Since you didn't mention any other MF lenses you can use a single lens preset and it will auto apply that to your one non-chipped lens.

 

[Angus Gibbins]

True, but if one is working with the RAW they likely want to use a more customized defish process just as they are using a more custom approach to the color, sharpening, and noise reduction.

The jpg means you see it in the view finder well enough to compose and for faster posting it does well enough when you would use jpgs anyway.

The alternative is a fast wide and no need for any straightening Kowa. You just have to live with the MF. Since you didn't mention any other MF lenses you can use a single lens preset and it will auto apply that to your one non-chipped lens.

I think you're overthinking my comment. It was a comment/observation, nothing more.

I understand why it doesn't apply to the RAW file, it's pretty much impossible. A RAW file is a raw data dump of what's on the camera sensor. If the camera processor has to apply any processing or correction, technically it's no longer a RAW file.