Previous news story    Next news story

Tamron and Tokina join Micro Four Thirds

By dpreview staff on Jan 26, 2012 at 18:17 GMT

Tamron and Tokina have joined the Micro Four Thirds group, meaning all three major third-party lens makers are likely to produce optics for the system. No further details of their intentions have been given. The announcement comes just after Sigma announced its first lenses for both Sony's E-mount and Micro Four Thirds - both lenses that we think make more sense on APS-C than the Micro Four Thirds format. It will be interesting to see whether Tamron and Kenko Tokina develop lenses specifically for the smaller format. Meanwhile high-end video manufacturer Astrodesign has also joined the consortium, and released a Micro Four Thirds mount 4K video camera head.


Press Release:

ASTRODESIGN, Inc., Kenko Tokina Co., Ltd. and Tamron Co., Ltd. join the Micro Four Thirds System Standard Group

Olympus Imaging Corp. and Panasonic Corporation jointly announced the Micro Four Thirds System standard in 2008 and have since been working together to promote the standard. Now we are pleased to announce that three more companies have recently declared their support for the standard and will be introducing products compliant with the Micro Four Thirds System standard.

ASTRODESIGN, Inc., a developer of advanced imaging-related equipment, such as the 4K camera system, that incorporates the latest technology; Kenko Tokina Co., Ltd., one of the world's leading manufacturers and developers of interchangeable lenses for digital and film SLR cameras; and Tamron Co., Ltd., an internationally renowned manufacturer of precision optics who has been providing powerful, high-quality lenses for a wide variety of fields for more than half a century. With the addition of exciting new products from these companies, the Micro Four Thirds lineup will become much more diverse, further increasing the potential of this advanced digital imaging system.

As the originator of the Four Thirds System and Micro Four Thirds System standards, Olympus Imaging Corp. will continue to develop and enhance the product lineup for both standards to meet the diverse needs of our customers.

ASTRODESIGN, Inc.

A Japanese company established in 1977 that designs and develops professional video equipment and measurement/analysis-related equipment. Well known for developing the world's first programmable signal generator and the Ultra HDTV image processor devices used at Expo 2005 Aichi, Japan.

ASTRODESIGN, Inc. Website
http://www.astrodesign.co.jp/english/

Kenko Tokina Co., Ltd.

A Japanese company established in 1957 that designs and develops a wide variety of photographic supplies and optical products. It is Japan's largest manufacturer/seller of lens filters.

Kenko Tokina Co., Ltd. Website
http://www.kenkoglobal.com/

Tamron Co., Ltd.

A Japanese company established in 1950 that designs and develops interchangeable SLR camera lenses, lens units for surveillance, as well as ultra-precision optical components based on the integration of advanced optical, electronic and precision machinery engineering technologies.

Tamron Co., Ltd. Website
http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/

The outlines of the standards can be checked at the Four Thirds website

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/index.html

Comments

Total comments: 94
dkadc
By dkadc (Mar 9, 2012)

A lot of zooms and primes are made in focal lengths that make sense on APS but a little less on mFT and FT. OM-D will only accelerate ILC's eating into sales of DSLR's, and I'm looking forward to the day when lenses are made with mFT crop factor in mind first, and then adapted to APS instead of the other way around.

0 upvotes
Dario D
By Dario D (Jan 31, 2012)

I hope these companies (including Panasonic/Olympus) deeply think about what is said here:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?55853-Why-have-Micro-4-3-lenses-on-large-body-cams&p=438981

0 upvotes
max metz
By max metz (Jan 30, 2012)

For a format dogged by only one sensor manufacturer and very expensive glass, any 3rd party lens competition must surely be welcome.

0 upvotes
J2Gphoto
By J2Gphoto (Jan 28, 2012)

Is it me or does this site always seem to throw in a little dig against what they don't seem to like?

"both lenses that WE THINK make more sense on APS-C than the Micro Four Thirds format."

0 upvotes
CarlPH
By CarlPH (Jan 29, 2012)

They were talking about sigma lenses that are made for APS-C and M4/3rds format. M4/3rds already has decent fast primes so sigma throwing 2.8's at the fray doesn't make that much of a sense. But its a good start and I'm excited to see whats next.

3 upvotes
RonFrank
By RonFrank (Jan 27, 2012)

I think the 4/3 system has grown in popularity to the point 3rd party lens manufactures can no longer ignore it. Oly in Japan is doing very well with the micro system. There is also a lack of fast micro 4/3 lenses and that leaves a gap for lens makers to enter the line with some lenses that do not exist today. IMO that is a rare opportunity. For example I would like to see a 14-40 f2.8, or 12mm f1.8.

0 upvotes
JohnHoppy
By JohnHoppy (Jan 29, 2012)

Quite agree. Tho Olympus already do a 12mm f2. My Oly 14-54mm f2.8/3.5 4/3 lens is a cracker, if Sigma/Tamron would cover that in m4/3 I doubt many people would want the kit 14-42mm (which is already bettered by my older 14-45mm Pany). Most of us look to the independents for a cheaper but nonetheless good quality alternative: if they're only offering more of the same, my money goes to OlyPan, so why else would they compete? They're not stupid, and this is still a fast-developing market even if Canon have ignored it so far, I think we'll see some interesting products by and by.

0 upvotes
This is not a real name
By This is not a real name (Jan 27, 2012)

We've been here before I think. Sigma released a few lenses designed for APSC DSLRs but with four thirds mount, so they were not especially useful or convenient when used on the smaller-sensor cameras.

Now they'll do the same for mirrorless - take a lens designed for the APSC Sony E mount and stick a micro four thirds mount on it.

0 upvotes
Julian_K
By Julian_K (Jan 27, 2012)

True re Sigma, however Tokina and Tamron never signed up to the original 4/3 mount so hopefully they might take a bit more initiative than Sigma.

0 upvotes
JohnHoppy
By JohnHoppy (Jan 27, 2012)

For m4/3 the obvious niche the independents can fill is in the Superwide area. The question is - will they? So far Sigma's offerings have been odd to say the least. Apart from Olympus' 9-18mm, there's a yawning gap there. Good quality budget-priced lenses are where the independents score but size is paramount. My 4/3 fit Sigma 10-20mm is massive on a G2 though it's a great range to aim for. Panasonic have shrunk lenses beautifully, we should expect these independents to do the same or why would we buy?

0 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Jan 27, 2012)

Panasonic 7-14mm?

1 upvote
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Jan 27, 2012)

Panasonic 7-14mm?
It's $900 (just checked Amazon.com)
It's so out of reach that it's irrelevant....(for 98% of ppl)
Even the Sigma 12-24mm costs significantly less...
I cannot emphasize more...When M43 came out, it promised to bring consumer smaller lens (Smaller lens = less glass = less cost)
Now what?!

Sigma, Tamron...SOS!

1 upvote
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

Sigma's "odd" offerings make perfect sense on NEX, a 30mm normal that's almost exactly the sensor diagonal. At 45mm equivalent, it's a "better" normal than the 50mm lenses the SLR makers have been producing for decades. And a 28mm equivalent,a very nice wide angle.

four thirds is just getting the "sloppy seconds" again. I don't expect to see anything different from Tamron or Tokina, design for 1.5x crop, get the NEX version out the door, then slap a uFT mount on it to pick up a few more sales.

0 upvotes
CarlPH
By CarlPH (Jan 29, 2012)

I totally agree, m4/3rds need affordable ultrawides. Maybe Tamron and Tokina can beat Sigma to the punch. Go for it! :)

0 upvotes
joyclick
By joyclick (Jan 27, 2012)

The mounts and batteries for cameras should be standardized by legislation.

2 upvotes
Bob Yarbrough
By Bob Yarbrough (Jan 27, 2012)

never happen.

0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

Right. Legislation in the three countries that produce interchangeable lenses for the consumer market: Germany, Korea, and Japan. Then add on the US and France, who don't do consumer cameras, but do produce professional movie cameras. Then Canada, Denmark, and the UK, who are all still powers in scientific and industrial cameras.

Do you remember what happened with legislative efforts in stereo TV, hi def discs, HDTV, etc.? The governments ground on so slowly that the manufacturers started making stuff their own way, and the marketplace shook out the winners...

0 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (Jan 27, 2012)

That's aiming too high. In Korea, all cell phone are required by law to be compatible with a universal charger. Similarly, it would be nice if all camera batteries use the same charger; batteries can still be different size, but the connectors should be the same.

Also, I hate it when camera doesn't use a standard USB cable (like my Olympus and Samsung cameras); one end still plugs in to a standard USB port, but the end that goes into the camera is some proprietary BS. WTF?

0 upvotes
88SAL
By 88SAL (Jan 28, 2012)

I suppose it has alot to do with design requirements. Look at some of the canon IXUS models, they are so slimline you have to wonder how they fit it all in. No way you are putting a G12 battery in those. I have no problem with battery standards, because our minor inconvenience of having a few different chargers might directly hamper the design and improvment of future models. You try to design a device with specific requirements and tell us the problems you encounter?

0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 30, 2012)

That's a case of the public pushing for something, the cell phone makers doing it, and only then, the lawmakers all over the world jumping on the bandwagon and saying "we're making a law".

You want an idea of what happens when the lawmakers proceed without industry leadership, look at Nikon. Japan came up with some new regs on batteries, so Nikon just pulled the D700 and D300 from the Japanese market.

0 upvotes
Uaru
By Uaru (Jan 31, 2012)

And that would mean, that it would be forbidden to manufacture a new camera for the set of legacy lenses that I laready have...

Thank you very much, but I will organize a big protest against such law.

0 upvotes
GDMitchell
By GDMitchell (Feb 5, 2012)

I don't think we really want politicians deciding the standards for cameras. Remember they made the rules that governed the banks and financial institutions and look at the mess that ended up in. Leave design to the designers. It's up to the consumers to decide what to buy but if we all bought with our heads instead of our hearts we'd not commit to anything until the manufacturer did. M4/3 cameras were pointless before the 20mm pancake from panasonic because the kit lenses are disproportionate to the camera size and they are utterly average or worse in performance. The lack of a good quality viewfinder on the smaller cameras renders them useless unless you have good short sighted vision and/or use auto focus lenses out of direct sunlight. I cannot understand why it is beyond the ability of Sony, Olympus, Panasonic etc to put a quality viewfinder in the rangefinder styled cameras. The bolt on ones look ugly and bulky and disable the hotshoe

0 upvotes
lomo3108
By lomo3108 (Jan 27, 2012)

astrodesign, tamron, tokina... sounds like a pretty good day for m43.

2 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Jan 27, 2012)

I'd say this is great news!
Choice is always welcomed by consumers, and I hope that competition will drive the ridiculous M43 lens prices down

1 upvote
wlee829
By wlee829 (Jan 27, 2012)

I'm luving it!

I wonder if it's because of the OM-D? Maybe Olympus really has something exciting that has 2 lens and a high end video manufacturer come on board.

I'm still shooting the E-5 but got my wife the EPM-1 for X-mas. I hope that the OM-D is the m4/3 camera I've been waiting for. The E-5 is great but it's a lot of camera to be hauling around.

0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

No, it's actually because of the NEX.

Look at Sigma: they didn't "join" micro four thirds until they were ready to release lenses in both uFT and NEX mount, and when they did, it was a 30mm and a 19mm. Those are "NEX friendly" focal lengths, 45mm and 28mm equivalent. On uFT, they're a lackluster 60mm and 38mm equivalent.

There's a reason 58mm lenses flopped so badly on the 35mm SLRs of the 60s and quickly got replaced by 50mm...

0 upvotes
Julian_K
By Julian_K (Jan 27, 2012)

Joseph I don't believe Tokina and Tamron have committed to the Sony E-Mount have they? So I'm not sure what this announcement has to do with the the NEX?

2 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 30, 2012)

Julian, Tamron announced it back in December.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/12/08/TamronNEX18200

Tokina has been vehemently denying they are, but there have been sightings.

Even without announcements, it's obvious that the NEX, with a larger market share than uFT, is the big fish that the lens makers want to hook.

0 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Jan 27, 2012)

Too many lens mounts for too many camera brands. Why don't we think about a standard for the lens mount? Can we consider a mini - PL mount with enhanced electronic signal connections? On the other hand, we all knows that Panavision produces a line of super high quality lenses for their cameras, although their rental cost is very expensive, why don't we consider to have some kind of cooperation with them so that we can use their lenses for the still photos. I believe there is potential in this business.

0 upvotes
Plochmann
By Plochmann (Jan 30, 2012)

There are less lens mounts now than ever. And don't say that, Panavision will find and kill you.

0 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Jan 31, 2012)

there are less (actual) lens mounts, but the market has also changed. Today, there's less place for a wide variety of lens mounts. Product development is very costly and you can't really afford a flop these days.

0 upvotes
Nic Walmsley
By Nic Walmsley (Jan 27, 2012)

as the recent Sigma news demonstrated, unless they offer high quality m43 dedicated lenses, few will buy them. the quality has to be there.

1 upvote
IcyVeins
By IcyVeins (Jan 27, 2012)

Take THAT, Canikon!

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 27, 2012)

As Admiral Yamamoto said after his attack on Pearl Harbor, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." I wouldn't rule out Canon. You can bet that they are learning from all the mistakes and deficiencies of all the mirrorless systems so far, studying them intently, as they design their own mirorless system. As for Nikon, well, I think they've made a mistake by betting on such a small sensor format for their mirrorless system. m4/3 is the smallest sensor I'd ever go for in a mirrorless system. I would never go smaller than that.

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Jan 27, 2012)

Canon never goes all out, FYI.

0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

Yeah, they're all full of terror that the companies that have been making Nikon and Canon lenses for several decades are now going to launch a few in Panasonic mount.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 28, 2012)

audijam - I don't know what you mean by "all out", but Canon certainly does what it needs in order to do well and capture a big chunk of any camera market they go into.

0 upvotes
sedentary_male
By sedentary_male (Jan 27, 2012)

Too little too late ??

0 upvotes
Nismo350Z
By Nismo350Z (Jan 27, 2012)

Well, this is a huge boost to the m4/3 format. The only thing left to improve is battery life so I think Sanyo Eneloop should join m4/3 as well ;)

2 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 27, 2012)

Sanyo is allready onboard from the beginning of 43 in 2003!!!!

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

@Nismo, eneloops are NiMH batteries, with less than half the power to weight or power to volume ratio as the rechargeable lithiums that Oly and Panasonic already use.

@digifan, not any more. Sanyo sold that part of their company to Panasonic a couple of years ago.

Actually, no one is left from the original four thirds "participants". Kodak, Sanyo, and Kindai are gone, and Fuji never actually made anything in four thirds and just launched a competing system.

Today, we have an entirely new gang: Panasonic, who basically took four thirds away from Olympus, scrapped the inane "telecentricity" lie, then came up with the larger "multiple aspect ratio" sensor to do away with 4:3. Six lens manufacturers who Panasonic and Oly had to let join, because they would have reverse engineered the mount anyway, and embarrassed the "open standard" promoters...

0 upvotes
radix1
By radix1 (Jan 28, 2012)

Panasonic bought Sanyo, so technically they're in the consortium :)

0 upvotes
Phil Flash
By Phil Flash (Jan 27, 2012)

Tokina, please simply adapt your 11-16 2.8 for M43 right now.

Then get to work on M43-specific designs.

It shouldn't be too hard to innovate the heck out of Oly and Panasonic.

0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (Jan 28, 2012)

Oly 11-22, 4/3 lens+ adaptor for M4/3. No autofocus, but easy to Manual focus because large depth of field.

0 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (Jan 26, 2012)

Dear Tamron and Tokina,

Please optimize your lenses to the 2x crop factor instead of using APS-C sized glass with a mount adapter. Otherwise they will be too big relative to dedicated m4/3 lenses.

2 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

As long as the APS market remains substantially larger than the four thirds market, I can't see that happening.

0 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (Jan 26, 2012)

If either company is listening, I'd like a (specifically designed for M4/3) long telephoto with image stabilization please. Don't mind whether it's a prime, or a zoom, but I want it to be sharp!

An M4/3 lens doesn't need the width of glass that a full frame does, so we should be able to make it much smaller (and lighter) which is good for us, and as an added bonus it'll be cheaper for you to make too!

I wonder whether you can make an M4/3 lens by physically "cropping" the elements of a full frame lens? Might be an easy way to build a prototype ;)

0 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Jan 27, 2012)

The front part of a telephoto has to be large. That's determined purely by the focal length and f-stop. You can only narrow the rear elements, and you can't do that much, because then you'd have this massive front end narrowing to a tiny "fulcrum point" and the torque would snap the lens in half.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 26, 2012)

This is great news. If they are taking requests, I've take something like the Tamron 17-50 2.8, and from Tokina, an 11-16 2.8, both with focal lengths and apertures adjusted for the m43 sensor. And a Tamron 90 macro would be great.

0 upvotes
nikvis
By nikvis (Jan 26, 2012)

Its not Tokina, its Kenko Tokina! So, probably that means accessories about m4/3 products and not lenses.
http://www.kenkoglobal.com/

1 upvote
PaulSnowcat
By PaulSnowcat (Jan 26, 2012)

Well... there gonna be some lenses, made for NEX, adapted for m4/3, as normal Sigma's were adapted for 4/3. So what? As usual - no wide angle...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
random78
By random78 (Jan 26, 2012)

We don't know yet if Tokina and Tamron will take the same approach as Sigma. They might show more sense.

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Jan 26, 2012)

Please let them have sense !

0 upvotes
PaulSnowcat
By PaulSnowcat (Jan 26, 2012)

random78, true, but creation of 2 different lenses is twice the price then creation of one lens and using it for different systems. And this (one lens for all systems) is the way of working for all third party manufacturers, that;s how they make money, that's how they keep prices low...

0 upvotes
akjos
By akjos (Jan 26, 2012)

About time... Im hopefully going to join m43 train soon and i loved tokina on my nikons so its great. Since sigma sucks in general and their m43 announced lenses deserve big buuuuu, ( who wants slowish fat prime lenses in approximate FL that is already out there?) I hope tamron announces some 17 mm thats at least 1.8.
Or decent zoom would be good. But since it makes cameras much bulkier ( i might as well have entry level dslr then) Id be much happier with something like samsung NX primes.

0 upvotes
digifan
By digifan (Jan 27, 2012)

--

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Jan 26, 2012)

Good news.
Among the mirrorless systems, I like MFT best because of the comparatively broad selection of lenses.
Well... I see an affordable, light and good quality prime lens missing, why?
I mean: just a plain normal 25mm with a max aperture of 1.8 or 2.0 for a price of 250 Euro or below. I'm sure that would sell very well...
Come on, Tokina, come on, Tamron! :)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Jan 26, 2012)

What wrong with the Panasonic 20 1.7. This is my most used lens on m43. The Olympus 45 1.8 is another excellent, fairly inexpensive prime that I really like.

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Jan 26, 2012)

The 20/1.7 is €350 not €250.

1 upvote
digifan
By digifan (Jan 27, 2012)

The 20mm F1.7 is just that a 20. A 25mm is much better AOV and less distortion of the subject, it's a world of difference!!!

0 upvotes
martink111
By martink111 (Jan 28, 2012)

The PL 25 1.4 is an awesome lens (but for the price it better be). I am continuously floored by its performance with respect to my SLR.

0 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Jan 31, 2012)

oh sorry... I misunderstood the word "prime". What I meant was a standard focal length lens, those classical 50mm on a FF)! Yes, the 1,7/ 20mm would be my choice at the moment too, but I'd better like 25mm. (and a price a little lower, as would probably many first time prime lens buyers too.)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 26, 2012)

who buys lenses for m43 cameras?
except some gear heads who frequent sites like this one.

whenever i see someone with a m43 camera he uses the kit lens....

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Cipher
By Cipher (Jan 26, 2012)

My Panny GF1 came with the 20mm kit lens. I'm such a noob for using a crappy kit lens.

8 upvotes
random78
By random78 (Jan 26, 2012)

We could say the same about DSLRs. Go to any public place and you will see a large crowd of DSLR owners with kit lenses mounted. But that doesn't mean there aren't many other users who use lenses other than kit lenses. Same is true for m43, no real difference.

15 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 26, 2012)

That gross generalization can also be applied to the majority of APS-C DSLR users, too.

I'm a DSLR user, but recently I got an E-PM1. Right now, I have the 14-42 kit and 40-150 tele, but I'll be getting the Panny 20/1.7 and Oly 45/1.8. And I'll certainly be happy to look at what lenses Tamron/Tokina produce.

3 upvotes
chadley_chad
By chadley_chad (Jan 26, 2012)

Wow - Henry Hertz is either a troll or just plain stupid!

Answer is me (along with hundreds of thousands of others users worldwide); me, a P&S and DSLR owner!

I buy lenses for my GF3 and at times when I'm not using my 20mm F1.7, I use my kit lens because if I wanted to pay £800 (or whatever) for a decent replacement, I'll buy one cheaper for my DSLR instead.

Why must we out up with stupid postings!

8 upvotes
JackRoch
By JackRoch (Jan 26, 2012)

Me. 14mm + 20mm with my GF2. Kit lens never gets a look in.
Same equivalents with my Contax ST, S2 and Mamiya 645 Super.
Funny that.

Can't really think why I'd make different choices with different formats.

1 upvote
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 26, 2012)

well chadely_chad you are the troll here.
or you are just unable to read... as i wrote:

"except some gear heads who frequent sites like this one."

well i think that would include you.
but i guess your low IQ is the problem.....?

to the other "genies" here.... look at lens sale numbers!!

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
olympian_dp
By olympian_dp (Jan 26, 2012)

Henry - why don't you list the number of "non gear heads" who purchase separate lenses? Or an interchangeable lens format for that matter? I think you can't because the answer is 0. I'm sorry but we are all surrounded by our peers here and we are the only ones buying camera equipment like this. The rest are buying superzooms or point and shoots.

And can you and Chad desist from argumentum ad hominem? It really demeans you.

0 upvotes
Henry M. Hertz
By Henry M. Hertz (Jan 26, 2012)

i only have to look at our sales.

i can ask a friend who works for europas biggest electronic dealer. when he tells me they sell 4-5 canon/nikon lenses for each m43 lens.. that gives me an idea.

and of course... the posting was a bit polemic.. but i guess that is wasted here. :D

1 upvote
graybalanced
By graybalanced (Jan 26, 2012)

I would only buy an m43 if I could get more lenses. The ones available now don't seem fast enough (I tend to use my f1.8/f2 lenses on my Canon DSLR).

Not sure what the point of your post is since 90% of the time I see people with their Nikon or Canon DSLRs, especially tourists, they, too, are using the kit lens.

0 upvotes
jsis
By jsis (Jan 26, 2012)

I thought that m4/3 advantage is size and weight. When you start carrying lenses, that advantage starts to diminish. Might as well carry the full-sized DSLR...

0 upvotes
TomCreek
By TomCreek (Jan 26, 2012)

One of the dumbest comments I've seen ever.

Me, 20mm and 7-14 for Pan Gf1 and G2. Oh, and about 6 FD lenses over 20 years aog....will add another half dozen m43 capable lenses when I get an EOS-MFT adapter....

I wish forum moderators would delete irrelevant/abrasive posts here, one thing I do like better about photo.net

0 upvotes
SirSeth
By SirSeth (Jan 26, 2012)

That's what Canon thinks too. Why by an interchangeable lens camera at all if you are not going to interchange lenses? Noobs. The power of the many with the money don't convince me that I shouldn't love lens options. That's why I buy system cameras.

0 upvotes
micksh6
By micksh6 (Jan 26, 2012)

"they sell 4-5 canon/nikon lenses for each m43 lens.. that gives me an idea."
And they probably sell 4-5 Canikon bodies for each m4/3 body too.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Jan 26, 2012)

jsis- even with a full set of lenses, the size advantage of m4/3 over a full size DSLR is still massive. Take it from someone who still shoots with full sized DSLRs! My E-PM1, VF2, 14-42, and 40-150 all combined take up less space than my 60D + 17-40/4L, and weighs significantly less. The more lenses I add to each set-up, the bigger the size and weight difference grows!

1 upvote
Thomas22
By Thomas22 (Jan 27, 2012)

Well, I've bought the Olympus 45 mm f1.8 and Panasonic Leica 25 mm f1.4 lenses to go with the kit 14-140 mm zoom that came with my DMC-GH1. But I went with just the kit lens for the first 18 months that I had the camera, only buying additional lenses after I had gained the experience to have an idea of what I would want in additional lenses.

Does that make me a typical M4/3 buyer? Probably not, because that buyer doesn't pick a camera like the GH1. But then, the typical Canon Rebel or entry level Nikon buyer isn't rushing out and buying a bunch of lenses, either -- of the people I know that own one of those cameras, most only have one lens.

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Jan 27, 2012)

I guess I'm also a noob...bringing out my Canon 5D with kit lens (24-105 F/4L) =[ =[ =[

0 upvotes
chadley_chad
By chadley_chad (Jan 28, 2012)

Olympian and Mr Hertz ....

Why don't you take your stupid and rude coments and put them where lenses dont work!

Shame some posters on here (obviously new trolls!) are simply idiots!

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 26, 2012)

Good news for m4/3. I wonder if they will make real m4/3 optimized lenses, or just chunky ports from existing DSLR lenses.

0 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (Jan 26, 2012)

Both Sigma and Tamron have already released E-mount lenses. Tokina can be easily adapted too due to the larger mount on NEX. If anything, NEX and Fuji's APS-C format will be the standard.

3 upvotes
Traciatim
By Traciatim (Jan 26, 2012)

Now if we could just get 1 of the two big players to suck it up and put their stamp of approval on it then we can have m4/3 as the one standard for all consumer level interchangeable lens cameras. Not that it will ever happen, because they are stubborn and refuse to put customers first.

Just imagine if all lenses could work like USB. You just find one your like, plug it in, and it works.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Jan 26, 2012)

Not all of us want a 2x crop sensor, though. The standard can only be a standard if everyone starts using the exact same sized sensor or the lenses become large enough to cover any sensor. Neither are attractive proposals.

0 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Jan 26, 2012)

But then... make it two or three different systems.

... instead of every manufacturer doing their own stuff, most of them just offering a ridiculously small selection of lenses. That's not really the idea behind having interchangeable lenses.

0 upvotes
Thomas22
By Thomas22 (Jan 27, 2012)

It's pretty obvious that neither Nikon or Canon are anxious to embrace a non-proprietary format such as M4/3. In particular, Nikon's "1" format would need to absolutely bomb before Nikon would consider adapting M4/3...and even then, they probably still wouldn't.

It's a shame, because I think that M4/3 represents a pretty good compromise position between D-SLRs and compact cameras. If one company offered full-frame and APS-C D-SLRs, M4/3 ILC, and compact cameras, they'd really have all the bases covered.

0 upvotes
fberns
By fberns (Jan 31, 2012)

"It's a shame, because I think that M4/3 represents a pretty good compromise position between D-SLRs and compact cameras"

Although I prefer 3:2 formats, I also find MFT a great compromise!
And I'm curious to see what Pentax' 2nd mirrorless mount will look like, but probably it will just be another totally new mount. It would be really nice to see other manufacturers than Panasonic and Olympus co-operate as well.
A broader lens choice would definitely benefit us users! (and would strengthen the mount's market share. Sooner or later, one or the other mirrorless system will very probably die with that much similar size mounts available.

0 upvotes
Nate21
By Nate21 (Jan 26, 2012)

The different companies that join a open format means a great selection of products.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Jan 26, 2012)

What makes you think it's an open format?

1 upvote
SteB
By SteB (Jan 26, 2012)

When m4/3 was announced there was clarification about that, I think in the BJP. Whilst 4/3 was supposed be an open format, m4/3 was definitely by invitation only.

0 upvotes
JackRoch
By JackRoch (Jan 26, 2012)

Wiki (yes, yes, I know) describes it as:
"an open standard, but companies may only use it under a non-disclosure agreement".
Perhaps not the most open form of 'open' !

1 upvote
jsis
By jsis (Jan 26, 2012)

No it's not, take a look at what happened to four thirds. You don't have to look far to see that more and more companies start abandoning that format.

0 upvotes
CharlesTokyo
By CharlesTokyo (Jan 26, 2012)

From what I understand one difference between 4/3s and m4/3s is the requirements of the companies that join. In the former anyone could join, but they wouldn't have to do anything with the standard. in m4/3s manufacters who join must support the standard (release products). We may see fewer companies in m4/3s, but we will see products from them.

0 upvotes
Chez Wimpy
By Chez Wimpy (Jan 26, 2012)

You have never seen press releases from Canon/Nikon saying they were welcoming other parties to join (and compete within) their own camera line. In comparison m43 (and NEX) is certainly an "open" format - even if it culminates from behind the scenes negotiations. Fujifilm made it clear they chose NOT to join.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 94