Previous news story    Next news story

Olympus introduces M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 'Pro' zoom

By dpreview staff on Sep 10, 2013 at 04:00 GMT
Buy on GearShop$999.00

Olympus has unveiled a high-end standard zoom to match the E-M1, the M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm 1:2.8 PRO. It offers a 24-80mm equivalent range, is dust-, splash- and freeze-proof, and uses a manual focus clutch design similar to the 12mm F2 and 17mm F1.8 primes. A minimum focus distance of 0.2m offers 0.3x magnification, and the lens has a L.Fn button whose function can be customised from the camera. The 14 element / 9 group design is packed full of exotic glass, and includes two aspheric elements. Minor ergonomic improvements include a locking lens hood and centre-pinch lens cap.

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO, with focus ring snapped back to reveal distance scale

Olympus has also announced the development of a matching M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO telezoom, which is scheduled to be released by the end of 2014. It's given few further details, but the press images show it'll be a substantially larger lens than Panasonic's Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS (as you'd expect). After that, Olympus plans to release a wideangle zoom and super-telephoto prime in this nascent Micro Four Thirds 'PRO' range. It seems that these are unlikely to be direct Micro Four Thirds equivalents of the existing Four Thirds Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm F4 and Zuiko Digital 300mm F2.8, but instead offer different headline specs.

 The Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO is scheduled for release by the end of 2014

From now on Olympus's Micro Four Thirds lens line will be divided up into three segments, similar to how the company organised its Four Thirds lenses into 'Standard', 'High Grade' and 'Super High Grade' (the latter two known as 'Pro' and 'Top Pro' in some markets). Alongside the new top end 'PRO' line, there'll also be a 'Premium' range, which we're led to believe will include current primes such as the M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8, M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 and M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm F2.

Finally the company has quietly revealed a new lens hood for the M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm F3.5-6.3 EZ, which until now has made do with sharing the rectangular LH55B originally designed for the collapsible M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 wideangle zoom. The LH55C is a petal-shaped hood that should be more effective at reducing flare from stray light. See below for an image.

Jump to:


Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typeZoom lens
Max Format sizeFourThirds
Focal length12–40 mm
Image stabilisationNo
Lens mountMicro Four Thirds
Aperture
Maximum apertureF2.8
Minimum apertureF22.0
Number of diaphragm blades7
Aperture notesCircular diaphragm
Optics
Elements14
Groups9
Special elements / coatings1 aspherical element, 1 dual-sided aspherical element, 2 ED glass elements, 2 HR glass elements, 1 EDA glass element, 1 HD glass element
Focus
Minimum focus0.20 m (7.87)
Maximum magnification0.3×
AutofocusYes
Motor typeStepper motor
Full time manualYes
Focus methodInternal
Focus notesManual Focus Clutch mechanism
Distance scaleYes
DoF scaleNo
Physical
Weight382 g (0.84 lb)
Diameter70 mm (2.75)
Length84 mm (3.31)
SealingYes
Zoom methodRotary (extending)
Filter thread62 mm
Filter notesDoes not rotate on focusing
Hood suppliedYes
Hood product codeLH66

Additional images

12-40mm F2.8 cutaway showing optical design   The 12-40mm is dust- and water-resistant
12-40mm F2.8 on OM-D E-M1   12-40mm F2.8 on OM-D E-M1, with hood 
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO  The LH66 hood has locking buttons on either side 
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO  LH55C hood for M.ZD 12-50mm F3.5-6.3 EZ 
521
I own it
178
I want it
9
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm 1:2.8 PRO

Comments

Total comments: 155
Biowizard
By Biowizard (6 months ago)

FINALLY a possible reason to switch to the OM-D EM-1 ... I would be happy to walk around all day and night with this piece of glass as my "standard" zoom.

Brian

0 upvotes
Akkers2012
By Akkers2012 (7 months ago)

Check out the review of the lens on Ming Thein. Pretty amazing!

3 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

Worthy successor of the Zuiko 12-60. You lose on the long end, but you gain in light-gathering, smaller size, better macro and AF speed.

Do you guys remember the pandemonium when the 12-50 was shipped with the E-M5? Though it was decent and versatile as a kit lens, a lot of fanboys were deeply disappointed.

5 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

I would have prefered if they have made a micro 4/3 version of the classic Zuiko 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0. That was and still is one of the best 4/3 lens made so far.

The 12-50mm which came with the E-M5 is a compromise lens. Perhaps Olympus was just testing the market. Optically, it is only "so-so".

The "test" by Ming Thien is only a very brief one but nevertheless its better than nothing. Let's wait for a detail test soon. Can DPR get one out soon?

At the asking price of $1,000.00, most of us have high expectation.

2 upvotes
BBking83
By BBking83 (7 months ago)

"I would have prefered if they have made a micro 4/3 version of the classic Zuiko 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0. That was and still is one of the best 4/3 lens made so far."

I totally disagree. That's what the new E-M1 is for. The 4/3s glass!!

I'm really happy with the m4/3 road map. I'm definitely picking up the 12-40 and the 40-150 later down the track.

1 upvote
Paul Guba
By Paul Guba (7 months ago)

I would have brought the 12-40 18 months ago without hesitation, but with so many more mirrorless options now I really don't feel the compulsion.

1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (6 months ago)

Other mirrorless systems still don't have weather sealed and constant f/2.8 zooms.

0 upvotes
saracino
By saracino (7 months ago)

Silly question... Is this lens fitting the new Pana GX7, isn'it? Just to double check!

0 upvotes
Macx
By Macx (7 months ago)

Yes, it fits the GX7

0 upvotes
saracino
By saracino (7 months ago)

Thank you!!!!

0 upvotes
technotic
By technotic (7 months ago)

It's not stabilised though so you're better off with the Panasonic 12-35?

0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

GX7 has IBIS so it's the best Panasonic body with Olympus lenses.

4 upvotes
zapatista
By zapatista (7 months ago)

Wow, these look like the new Sigma lenses...

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

maybe new Sigma lenses were designed by Olympus.

2 upvotes
technotic
By technotic (7 months ago)

I thought it was the other way around.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

Most likely it is design by Olympus and assembled by Sigma. Olympus has a longer history in lens design.

Similarly, Zeiss lenses are designed by Zeiss but made in Japan by Cosina. Zeiss make the lens element and the famous T* coating as well.

Its just a business arrangement.

2 upvotes
Earlack
By Earlack (7 months ago)

... Well I don't have much use for 12-40 ATM, but one thing I'm veeeeery excited about is someting that has been missed by lotsa people it seems :

"[...]After that, Olympus plans to release a wideangle zoom and *super-telephoto prime* in this nascent Micro Four Thirds 'PRO' range..."

HELL YEAH ! At last a fast native prime for telephoto ! the 75-300 is good but sometimes a better aperture is needed. loev also my 40-150, best bang for the buck at 120 € new...

Would really lke to know the FL of that new super-telephoto though.

1 upvote
acidic
By acidic (7 months ago)

12-40mm/2.8 seems sweet, especially the push-pull AF/MF. Too bad it's bulkier than the Pana 12-35mm/2.8; I would've guessed otherwise, considering the Pana has O.I.S.

1 upvote
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

The Pana 12-35mm f2.8 is quite soft at f/2.8 according to tests, thus I am staying with the Pana 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 which is probably the sharpest micro4/3 zoom lens so far. Just love it since it came with my GF1. What I loose out is not having 12mm.

Lets see how good this lens is. If it is as good as the 75mm f/1.8 it would be wonderful. Now, lets wait for some test reports.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

12-35/2.8 is pretty sharp at open and the sharpness doesn't change when you stop it down till f/5.6 something.

then it's only tested on a low resolution 16MPix sensor and the peripheral quality is not very good.

a handy walk-around lens, should be good if at reasonable price (12-40/2.8 is at least more reasonable than Pana).

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (2 months ago)

Hey yabokkie,

Just curious--and I'm probably not the only one--what kind of work do you do that a 16 Mp sensor is "low-resolution"?

I made fantastic 8x10 prints with a 2 Mp Kodak sensor, my first digital camera, and find 10Mp more than adequate for 13x19 prints.

I was involved in a project where an ad was produced for a billboard at a high school, and the camera was an 8 Mp Fuji. The billboard looked awesome, and contained way more detail than anybody could have absorbed without staring at it for ten minutes or so...

So what is it that you do exactly, that 16 Mp is "low resolution"? What kind of pictures do you produce? How are they printed?

0 upvotes
lighthunter80
By lighthunter80 (7 months ago)

I think it's a very good lens and offer. Considering the price it seems reasonable to me for a 'pro-line' zoom.

Unfortunately Olympus or Panasonic didn't leverage the small format yet to come up with a f2.0 zoom. This lens here could have been done as constant 2.0 but then the price would have been at least 50% higher I suppose.

Anyway... I won't get it. I stick to fast primes :)

0 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (7 months ago)

Olympus has at least three f2 lenses for 4/3s, but my understanding is you have to use an adapter for them to work on micro 4/3/. They're also somewhat costly, about $2500 for the 12-35, the 35-100 and the 150mm f/2. But I bet you could do some serious damage with them.

0 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (7 months ago)

12-40 is boring, because we already have the 12-35.

But the 40-150 looks sweet... But large. I wonder how it would compare to the current M.Zuiko 3.5-4.5/40-150. It is pretty sweet lens too, continuing the traditions of the plastic fantastic Zuiko 40-150.

0 upvotes
Lab D
By Lab D (7 months ago)

The 14-54 was a great lens. I don't know if the em1 will work well with it. This one may be a good alternative.

0 upvotes
MrTritium
By MrTritium (7 months ago)

The 14-54+adapter is much longer and heavier than the 12-40. Look here:
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/special/matching.html

0 upvotes
MrTritium
By MrTritium (7 months ago)

A comparison with the Sony-Zeiss f4 16-70 :

- The Oly lens is 1 stop faster, but a same gen. APS-C sensor will perform slightly better than a m43 one. However the difference is less than stop if we compare OM-D vs NEX-7:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/793%7C0/(brand)/Olympus/(appareil2)/736%7C0/(brand2)/Sony

- Both start at eq. 24mm, but the SZ goes to 105mm while the Oly stops at 80mm.

- Eq. depth of field should be slightly better with the Oly: f5.6 vs f6

- The SZ is smaller and lighter: 67mm x 75mm & 308g vs 70mm x 84mm & 382g

- The Oly isn't stabilized, but Oly's IBIS is excellent. SZ lens has OSS

- The Oly is splash/dust proof, I dunno about the SZ

Close call. If I had the money I think I would choose a Nex6/7+16-70 over an E-M1/5+12-40 for a slightly smaller and lighter package. But then there are more nice primes in m43 mount...

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

16-70/4 is about 0.3 stops slower.

16-70/4 is about 25-105mm f/6.1 equiv. and
12-40/2.8 is about 24-78mm f/5.5 equiv.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
MrTritium
By MrTritium (7 months ago)

Don't feed the troll...

3 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (7 months ago)

And the Oly has significantly higher magnification (multiply by crop factor to get a fair comparison).

But... we have no idea how either one performs optically yet, or how they focus, or how much they extend.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

for what do people need magnification, like object field size of an iPad mini for your baby: 36 / 200 = 0.18 equiv.
or accessories on an iPhone: 36 / 124 = 0.29 equiv.

0 upvotes
88SAL
By 88SAL (7 months ago)

Do people think the sole purpose of aperture is DOF? For feffs sake please drop it. I consider having a stop faster for the purpose of achieving exposures over DOF control any day. If the DOF of a m43 vs Apsc vs whatever else is concerning you, go buy a FF camera and end this calculating the equivalents which mean nothing till go go out and actually take some photos. You want DOF? Go buy a Leica with 50/1 lens.

4 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

I'd say the Zuiko 12-40 F2.8 is at least in a class above the Sony 16-70 F4. Better IQ, faster, quicker AF and weather sealed completely.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

> Do people think the sole purpose of aperture is DOF?

then what do people need? every photographic effect that is controlled by the aperture will be the same if DOF is same.

we have only one aperture right?

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

> then what do people need?

Light for proper exposure?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

Hmmm m4/3rds tend to be software corrected lens. Will it be up to f2.8-3.5 11-22mm, 14-54mm, 50-200mm Zuiko Digital. In three lens you've got it covered in terms of quality and coverage chuck in Pany Leica 25mm f1.4... 12-60mm SWD distortion at 12mm put me off...

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (7 months ago)

Only the cheap lenses show evidence of software correction...

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (7 months ago)

I'm not a zoom fan, but that lens is absolutely beautiful!

8 upvotes
M DeNero
By M DeNero (7 months ago)

A constant f/4 with longer range would be better for this type of camera. Now you have two choices for a walk-around lens: a pathetically sluggish f/3.5-6.3; or a chunky, truncated f/2.8.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (7 months ago)

24-80mm is a pretty decent range for a walkaround, no?

9 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (7 months ago)

This lens doesn't look so chunky to me. It seems to be about the same size as the 75mm-f/1.8

0 upvotes
M DeNero
By M DeNero (7 months ago)

24-80 is not bad, but 24-100 would be better. After thinking about it and visualizing based on actual measurements, I retract my "chunky" comment. I always underestimate how small the OMD actually is.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

80 f/2.8 is very close to 113 f/4 after digital zoom (in terms of total light, and so noise etc), which on mirrorless works beautifully with preview in EVF and the screen. In case on OM-D E-M5, digital tele only limited to 2x, but there is 3:4 crop which works like 1.33x zoom, just turn the camera 90 degrees. :) On Panasonics, there is proper digital zoom.
Or just crop in post.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

> A constant f/4 with longer range

would like to see a handy f/4 equiv. or 12-40/2.
maybe Sigma is doing a 12-40/1.4 now.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

Has to top Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 DC HSM Lens £650...When the Oly f2 Zooms came out on 4/3rds they were hot stuff...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (7 months ago)

Full frame Sigma 24-70mm f/2 OS HSM coming.

http://photorumors.com/2013/07/29/sigma-rumored-to-announce-a-new-24-70mm-f2-os-hsm-full-frame-lens-next-year/

0 upvotes
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

That'll be deal while I'm saving up for my large format camera 20x24 inch. Yep that's no typo there 20x24 inch film and yep that's more than 50cm on one side. Load the film up lads. On a serious note the Zuiko and the Sigma are round the 800g mark it will interesting to see how much 35mm version weighs in at...

0 upvotes
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

Plus the sensor size is gonna play havoc with the IQ. Vignetting, corner sharpness , and all the other compromises start coming. APS would be interesting but in about three zooms you have coverage and quality.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

18-35/1.8 is designed for APS-C SLR, the most difficult.
we deserve even higher quality zooms for mirrorless.

I would prefer 16-50/1.8 for APS-C mirrorless
and 12-40/1.4 for m4/3"

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (7 months ago)

Olympus fast Pro F2.0 4/3rd zooms on Amazon :

Olympus Zuiko 14-35mm f/2.0 Digital ED SWD Lens for Olympus Digital SLR Cameras :
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Zuiko-14-35mm-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000X1P5R4

Olympus 35-100mm f/2.0 Zuiko Lens for E Series DSLR Cameras :
http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-35-100mm-Zuiko-Series-Cameras/dp/B000BKP1JE/ref=pd_sim_p_5

1 upvote
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

Yeah top lens but with Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 DC HSM Lens on Canikon APS at £650, Oly has it's work cut out...

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

it's not efficient to mount an APS-C SLR lens on mirrorless body, would prefer a Sigma 12-40/1.4 for m4/3" but it won't be a handy walk-around lens like 12-40/2.8.

btw, the old ZD SLR lenses were designed for max 20MP sensor solution and f/2 on 4/3" is rather slow (their SHG line may comparable to low end L lenses for amateurs, f/4 zooms that pro don't use).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
NZ Scott
By NZ Scott (7 months ago)

Actually, the ZD SHG lenses are among the best zooms available on any format - certainly above "low-end L".

I agree that it's not efficient (in terms of size and weight) to mount APS-C lenses on an m43 body.

1 upvote
Artistico
By Artistico (7 months ago)

The 40-150 looks like just what I've been waiting for. Although I still have to wait a bit longer, it's nice to know it's on its way. I hope they give it a decent minimum focusing distance of less than 1m so it can cover most of my close-up needs too.

0 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (7 months ago)

Should they fix the blooming and black spot issues of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema, this would be the (almost) perfect GP lens for it. Too bad there's no OIS since the Oly has it on-cam.

0 upvotes
abolit66
By abolit66 (7 months ago)

2.8 is not fast enough for 4/3 format. it's 24-80 f 5.6 equivalent on FF

4 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (7 months ago)

ok, being fast is one thing, having a wider aperture is another. 2.8 is fast enough for anyone, but probably, not wide enough for people like you seeking FF OOF Bokeh.

5 upvotes
Haider
By Haider (7 months ago)

Speed and depth of field is different...

14 upvotes
blohum
By blohum (7 months ago)

oooh look, another equivalence comment... my surprise-o-meter is registering at 0.1%.

22 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

indeed, it's not fast enough. until we have f/-2 on m4/3 we won't be able to take decent photos.

8 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (7 months ago)

lol....some people~~~ lol

0 upvotes
Red5TX
By Red5TX (7 months ago)

Funny you never heard the Equivalence Police commenting on how brilliant Sigma's 18-35 f/1.8 APS-C lens is, and how it gives the same DOF as all those f/2.8 FF lenses.

4 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

no, they were there. however, i think the Sigma lens can work on FF cameras, so they didn't feel the need to "educate" and "correct misconceptions" that badly.

0 upvotes
M DeNero
By M DeNero (7 months ago)

You're joking, right?

0 upvotes
sadwitch
By sadwitch (7 months ago)

same goes for the 17-55 F2.8 is never bright for APS-c since its just a 27-80 f4 on a FF tsk tsk

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (7 months ago)

AND that sumbitch wont fit in my pocket!

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

17-55/2.8 on Canon APS-C is like 27.2-88/4.5 on Canon FF, assiming the same technology used for APS-C and FF sensors, so performance is proportional to area (FF area is MORE than twice as big as APS-C).
In case of the current m43 sensors vs current Canon APS-C sensors, f/2.8 is f/2.8 as the performance is about the same despite somewhat smaller m43 sensor area.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

m4/3" lenses are sold cheaper in Japan (1 USD = 100 JPY).
12-40/2.8 is JPY 89,880, with 5% point back (effectively 85,600) now.
https://shop.olympus-imaging.jp/product-detail/index/proid/6674

don't know about shipping which is free in Japan. also you get 1 year warranty instead of 3 years (but not very good service compared with CPS/NPS).

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

0.3x magnification - is it better or worse than 12-50 in its Macro mode?

0 upvotes
Artistico
By Artistico (7 months ago)

I'd say anything better than 0.25 is good for a non-macro.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

12-50 is 0.36x, still a little bit better. But you have to switch to it, and then it is only at 43mm.

0 upvotes
QuarryCat
By QuarryCat (7 months ago)

good news - when the hoods are coming with the lenses - for no extra charge!

we need a 4,0/50-300 mm and a 2,0/20-60 mm!

for mFT!
Hope that it doesn't take until 2015...

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

these lenses look very Sigmarish (the looks only).

0 upvotes
arbuz
By arbuz (7 months ago)

L-Fn button - so Olympus now copies Samsung NX solutions? Well, well, who would have thought...

2 upvotes
c_henry
By c_henry (7 months ago)

I don't know who was first or second, but I do know my Oly 12-50 has the same button.

3 upvotes
Chatokun
By Chatokun (7 months ago)

Not sure what's surprising. Good ideas are worth copying. I'm sure Olympus didn't invent the digital camera, nor the camera, nor lenses. Of course they're copying.

Apple copied Android's pull down from top because it was a good idea. They're copying Google Now's "time to home" because it's a good (though slightly creepy :P) idea.

Imitate and improve is how you get ahead. There can only be so much brand new ideas... and often those are still copied from nature etc.

2 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (7 months ago)

They've had the L-Fn buttons for well over a year now.

0 upvotes
Anfy
By Anfy (7 months ago)

Great great news, but that 40-150mm looks a bit on the large side for a m4/3 lens!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

it looks a bit large for a small aperture lens.
f/2.8 means very small aperture for 4/3".

it's about double of that of Pana 35-100/2.8 which is normal.
but the exact size and weight we don't know yet.

the price may also be double of that of 35-100/2.8
or 2,800 US. will be interested how the market will react.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Fiacre
By Fiacre (7 months ago)

"Olympus plans to release a wideangle zoom"
YESSSSS, hope it will come quickly !
I have the E-M5 (great camera) and the Panasonic 7-14. The lense is great except for the flare and reflexion between the rear lense and the sensor, especialy with the E-M5. The results are HORRIBLE, when you are inside a room with windows, it is very difficult to avoid these big purple phantom images. With a GX1, the flare is big too, but it is not so saturated (not purple) so it is less visible ( i think it is in connection with the sensor color and reflexion).
So i will have to send the Panasonic 7-14 and try the Olympus 9-18, waiting for an upgraded 7-14 from Oly ! Please, limited flare and weather sealed, it would be great :)

0 upvotes
Artistico
By Artistico (7 months ago)

The Panasonic camera corrects the file in-camera for Panasonic lenses. Yes, also in raw files. The correction includes both CA and distortion. You should technically be able to do the same in post processing, though.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

There is a solution for 7-14 ghosts - with gel UV filter.

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (7 months ago)

Not my kind of tools (for a street shooter) but I'm immensely happy to see this system grow in such a defining way.
Like it or not, m43 is part of the Future. A BIG part!

3 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (7 months ago)

So, is this like an official announcement of the end of FT? No more mirrored DSLR from Olympus.

Another thing... Why wait until end of 2014? Come on, is Olympus really so busy? Haven´t we seen similar lens "release notes" before? What's the point in fooling people to wait for something which may never come, like the Olympus 90mm macro lens? Or was it 100mm? I don't remember any more. OK, I know what the point is... to make them buy the products and wait... and wait... and wait...

1 upvote
photo nuts
By photo nuts (7 months ago)

If there was an Oly 90mm m43 macro lens, I would not have sold my entire m43 camera and lens collection.

0 upvotes
olyflyer
By olyflyer (7 months ago)

Well, the Oly promise was made for the original FourThirds, not the micro. Perhaps they even promised for the MFT, I don't know, but they certainly promised more than what they could keep in regard of the original FourThirds DSLR system. There is no point in "lens Road Map" which is not kept.

0 upvotes
Artistico
By Artistico (7 months ago)

@photo nuts - You can use any 90mm macro ever created for any camera system on M43. Like the OM Zuiko 90mm f2. Most people use manual focus for macro anyway...

3 upvotes
Fleabag
By Fleabag (7 months ago)

Well yes but then it's gong to act like a 180mm lens. Not sure you would want that.

0 upvotes
rpm40
By rpm40 (7 months ago)

He must have meant 90mm, not 90mm equivalent- otherwise, the 45 2.8 macro would work.

2 upvotes
NZ Scott
By NZ Scott (7 months ago)

There's already an outstanding M. Zuiko 60mm f2.8 Macro (same reach as 120mm on full-frame), not to mention the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 Macro. Photo nuts, why do you need 90mm?

0 upvotes
ntsan
By ntsan (7 months ago)

150-300mm F2.8, I know I can dream

2 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (7 months ago)

Dream? No, you just need to wake up and cough 6000$. The lens already exists.

http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-90-250mm-Zuiko-Series-Camera/dp/B000BTHPDK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1378808035&sr=8-1&keywords=olympus+90-250mm

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (7 months ago)

A 300mm f4 would make much more sense.

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

There's a four thirds 300 f2.8 prime. It's big and pricey.

2 upvotes
NZ Scott
By NZ Scott (7 months ago)

Also, the upcoming 40-150 f2.8 zoom will be equivalent to 80-300mm f5.6 with a 2x teleconverter.

0 upvotes
white shadow
By white shadow (7 months ago)

I don't see any teleconverters made for Micro 4/3.

However, one do not have to buy any new telephoto lens if one have a Canon or Nikon version. Just buy a converter to use them. Only problem is one has to shoot at the maximum aperture with manual focus.

0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

" It offers a 24-80mm equivalent range, is dust-, splash- and freeze-proof,"

allow me to be the first to say that not only is this lens only equivalent to a f5.6 on a FF camera, it is also only equivalent to sand, sprinkle and cold-proof as well. blah-blah-blah the upcoming cheap FF compacts will be the end of m4/3, blah-blah-blah.

10 upvotes
sabad
By sabad (7 months ago)

You are fooling yourself with that statement, "it's f5.6 on FF" but it's not designed for FF it's a m43 lens and it's f2.8 no matter how you bang your head.

18 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

insert facepalm here ^

5 upvotes
Kevin Sutton
By Kevin Sutton (7 months ago)

Just hit yourself a little harder with your palm, then you will realise that f2.8=f2.8. Equivalent DEPTH OF FIELD to a FF f5.6 yes, but razor thin depth of field does not equal image quality

24 upvotes
Beat Traveller
By Beat Traveller (7 months ago)

Wow, way to miss the painfully obvious sarcasm...

8 upvotes
Jonathan Parker Smith junior

The old ff, apc, m43, 6x6, 5x4, 8x10 focal length/aperture/Dof trope! Why does it someone have to bring this up in every time a company not producing 35mm format camera makes a new lens, it's boring and we all get it. If resolution, depth of field control and in particular narrow depth of field is your main aim, quit promoting micro formats like FF and go out and buy yourself a 8x10 with a 300mm f5.6 standard lens!

1 upvote
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (7 months ago)

Agentul, give up. Some people wouldn't recognize a sarcasm if it bit them on the leg.
Comments must be extremely serious, like announcing an attack on a foreign country or - preferably - informing someone a relative died.
And they must be written in such way that a 6 year old can fully understand it.
Also, this lens only resists to half the sand, cold and sprinkles a FF lens can stand. New equivalence theories here! Equivalent sand, equivalent cold, equivalent sprinkles. Yabokkie will have no end of fun calculating the possibilities.

7 upvotes
M DeNero
By M DeNero (7 months ago)

Constant f/4 for both would be better.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

"Constant f/4 for both would be better."

Take this lens.

set aperture priority: F4 on any m43 body.

There! Better now?

7 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (7 months ago)

Exciting development! Olympus and Panasonic can be proud of the system they have created. I just wish they both did a better marketing job in the US.

14 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (7 months ago)

Now we are talking!!!

3 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

we've been only whispering until now.

3 upvotes
Raist3d
By Raist3d (7 months ago)

I think this is great. Olympus kept the size relatively small, not going all out to F2.0 (good move, imho). The focal lens being a bit more modest means a higher quality optical lens (also good move).

What I would hope is Olympus does produce "Pro" branded/grade primes. Weather sealed, less software corrected and even better and/or faster.

4 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (7 months ago)

Makes all the NEX cameras look like toys.

17 upvotes
darkref
By darkref (7 months ago)

toys with better image quality :)

5 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

Whats wrong with NEX cameras ? Most have a lot of metal in their build and the lenses are also all pretty sturdy. Not sure what sort of statement you are trying to make.

3 upvotes
Anadrol
By Anadrol (7 months ago)

You should see a shrink to talk about your size issues :p

1 upvote
Jonathan Parker Smith junior

Aesthetically pleasing lens, it literally oozes the quality an aristocrat demands. I can see it will be perfect for photographing the hounds during fox hunting season, or sharing pictures of the latest acquisition to my extensive pre-18th century art collection. Jolly good show Olympus!

9 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

but, sir, the Leica logo is missing.

7 upvotes
Jonathan Parker Smith junior

@agentul, Leica is a brand of the Jerry's. It's an absolute disgrace, that the Queen continues to ignore this fact!

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

Leica is good,
as long as it's designed and made by Japanese, Koreans, etc.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 45 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
NZ Scott
By NZ Scott (7 months ago)

But Jonathan, are the Japs any better than the huns?

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (7 months ago)

Pace of releases is too slow. End of 2014 for the 40-150 and then new lenses after that. Come on, by then even Sony will have caught up to m4/3.

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

m4/3 has a pretty awesome lens lineup for only being 5 years old.

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (7 months ago)

Actually a decent lens line-up as long as you didn't want fast zooms, the primes were carrying the flag. Panasonic at least came to the rescue with the 12-35 and 35-100, but why we have to wait 16 months for the 40-150 and even longer for UWA zoom is crazy.

0 upvotes
Chaitanya S
By Chaitanya S (7 months ago)

micro 4/3 just got a lot more serious mirrorless format.

20 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

Well, Panasonic already makes 12-35 and 35-100/2.8, for a year or so.

3 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (7 months ago)

yes, but that's Panasonic. what good is a interchangeable lens camera if you can't also brag about a certain manufacturer being superior?

edit: competition is good, though. maybe it will drive the cost of the Panasonic lens down a bit.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

Good stuff ! Competition is always a good thing.

4 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

Hmm, I could buy a huge heavy 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom from CANIKON for $2500, or a lightweight portable 24-80mm f/2.8 for $1000 from OLYMPUS. Tough decision, there.

18 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (7 months ago)

Well you can always try the Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC for around $1000. :)

6 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

You skipped right over APS-C to make a point, huh?

8 upvotes
Gary Martin
By Gary Martin (7 months ago)

Bigger sensor, bigger gear. One size does not fit all.

2 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

Bigger sensor, bigger gear, bigger price, bigger ripoff, same visually discernible image quality at sub-mural size print and web outputs.

6 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (7 months ago)

"You skipped right over APS-C to make a point, huh?"

Well a Nikon 17-55/2.8 costs $400 more and weighs twice as much.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (7 months ago)

2 Mirrorless Crusader :

You should have really written: "I can buy a huge and heavy 24-70 f/2.8 from Canon/Nikon/Sony for $2500 (and for $1200 from Canon, if you can still find version I) or a lightweight portable 24-80 f/5.6 equivalent from Olympus". Indeed a difficult choice, especially taking into account that for $1200+ you can buy say Canon 24-105 f/4. :)

6 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

If you think it's f/5.6 equivalent, take an image with the Olympus lens at f/2.8 and another with a FF lens at f/5.6 at the same shutter speed and ISO and tell me with a straight face that the two images have identical exposure values.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
Just another Canon shooter
By Just another Canon shooter (7 months ago)

LOL! Nobody in their right mind will buy a f/5.6 standard range zoom, not to mention pay $1k for it.

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

Good thing this isn't an f/5.6 standard range zoom then.

6 upvotes
Giklab
By Giklab (7 months ago)

>24-80 f/5.6 standard zoom
Actually, it's 2.8. The 5,6 is only the DOF equivalent.

@flipmac I think tkbslc was talking about Pentax.

7 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (7 months ago)

also together with the sensor it's f/5.6 WRT low light performance, and diffraction. Cf. DXO.

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (7 months ago)

Hmm indeed, as you aren't buying a 24-80 f/2.8 now are you, and the price reflects this. Rather than berate DSLR's just be happy m4/3 lens offerings just improved. Both systems are wonderful.

3 upvotes
ppastoris
By ppastoris (7 months ago)

2 Mirrorless Crusader :
> take an image with the Olympus lens at f/2.8 and another with
> a FF lens at f/5.6 at the same shutter speed and ISO

Not the same ISO number of course :). On FF you'll use the corresponding ISO to get properly exposed image (4x higher ISO). Noise, DoF, AoV, and diffraction degradation of the image will be the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Sensor_size.2C_noise_and_dynamic_range

4 upvotes
Meuh
By Meuh (7 months ago)

I got a Da*16-50 f2 8 which is weather/dust sealed for £400, sits in the middle size wise but is quite heavy.

0 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

You're making a ridiculous argument. The bottom line is that the theoretical advantages of full frame are pretty much irrelevant for anyone who's not a full-time professional photographer and even for many who are. You pay more but the only thing you get more of is size and weight.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (7 months ago)

If your goals is to get the "same visually discernible image quality at sub-mural size print and web outputs", then why would you get a F/2.8 zoom for FF? Just get a F/5.6, shoot with two stops higher ISO, and hey presto, same visually discernible image quality what DR, SNR, DoF, you name it, is concerned. Or you can be a bigshot and get a Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC and go toe to toe with m43 F/1.4 glass.

3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

It is 12-40/2.8, and NOT 24-80/2.8 NOR 24-80/5.6 (although if somebody would make an FF sensor from 4 m43 sensors in this camera and 4 TruePic VII processors, it in effect would be closer to the later by comparison - but nobody does such a thing).

0 upvotes
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

Jon because I can get the same thing with m4/3 at a more portable size and better features than a stripped down entry-level FF camera.

0 upvotes
Ember42
By Ember42 (7 months ago)

The only actual physical parameters in a lens are focal length, and the actual aperture. If you use an 'equivalent' focal length, then you have to use the same 'equivalent' focal length in calculating the aperture ratio. f = 40mm, a = 14mm, f/a = 2.8. feq = 80mm, a = 14mm, feq/a = 5.6.

1 upvote
Mirrorless Crusader
By Mirrorless Crusader (7 months ago)

Okay, in that case, show me a 12-40mm f/2.8 full frame lens, let alone one that costs just $1000.

0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (7 months ago)

You can get F/1.4 zooms for m43? And they're portable? If you're satisfied by F/5.6 on FF, and don't need the extra DR andvresolution at base ISO, then you can get the same on m43. But you tried to claim that you'd need a 2400€ F/2.8 zoom for FF to match the Oly, something's that's blatantly false. Oh, and I wouldn't exactly call the D600 stripped down.

1 upvote
ppastoris
By ppastoris (7 months ago)

Jon Rty : +1

Mirrorless Crusader : you understand that 12-40mm f/2.8 full frame lens would have to cover much larger ff sensor and would therefore have much wider AoV, don't you? You'd be comparing it to m43 6-20mm f/1.4 lens.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (7 months ago)

LOL at the "PRO" emblem! :)

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

PRO for those who don't have a clue, and
those who don't have a clue are better customers than pros.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 22 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Red5TX
By Red5TX (7 months ago)

Yeah, that's actually pretty goofy. Great looking lens otherwise.

0 upvotes
Jay Jenner
By Jay Jenner (7 months ago)

Yeah,could have lived without PRO on it, but its a bit more subtle than building the whole thing in white isnt it? Then at least people need to look a bit closer to see that you have spent some money.

1 upvote
bucko1
By bucko1 (7 months ago)

Anyone have an idea when more Zeiss (and other) German lenses will become available (for micro 4/3rd's)? With the Japanese favoring plastic, slow speeds, and increasing product prices, extra costs involved for faster, real glass (and much sharper) lenses are of more interest (to me, anyway)

0 upvotes
m87501
By m87501 (7 months ago)

You can get Metabones adapter for Leica lens at bh, but no Zeiss E mount at this time.

0 upvotes
m87501
By m87501 (7 months ago)

edit:
You can get Metabones adapter for Leica lens at bh, but no Zeiss E adapter mount to go on mft at this time, not that I can find. Would be nice to put the new 16-70 Zeiss on the Oly em5 or em1. Seems like what exactly wanted is never available, I'm finding.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 155