Hi everyone. The aim of this post is not to complain about anything, but to try to get an explanation on this. In most "24x36" systems, there are fast 50 mm available for cheap. If I take B&H approximative prices for instance: Canon 50 mm f/1.8 -> 125$ Nikon 50 mm f/1.8 -> 115$ (200$ for the AF-S version) Sony 50 mm f/1.8 -> 170$ Pentax 50 mm f/1.8 -> 180$ For APS: Nikon 35 mm f/1.8 -> 200$ Sony 35 mm f/1.8 -> 220$ All these lenses have a wide aperture of f/1.8, have AF, an equivalent focal length of 50 mm, are cheap and are often the first prime you get when you buy a compatible camera. You need to go to 400$ approximately to find some other fast primes (like 85 mm f/1.8, 50 mm f/1.4 and so on). Now if we take what's available in micro 4/3, with AF, faster than f/2 (so Sigma lenses, Pana 14 mm and Oly 17 mm f/2.8 do not qualify): - Panasonic 20 mm f/1.7: 385$ - Olympus 25 mm f/1.8: 400$ - Olympus 45 mm f/1.8: 400$ All other primes are 500$ and more. That's 3 times the price of Canon or Nikon 50 mm f/1.8, more than twice the price of Pentax and Sony. I'm not discussing the quality of the lenses or saying that they are overpriced. I'm wondering why there isn't any cheap 25 mm f/1.8, all plastic, around a 150$ price range? Is it because: - it's a choice made by Panasonic & Olympus? (they may prefer building higher quality, more expensive lenses) - the 24x36 lenses are not quite old and produced at high numbers, and that their cost is now very low? - it would me more difficult to conceive a cheap 50 mm for mirrorless systems? - ???