Reading mode: Light Dark

Do you still prefer quality primes for 4/ 3rds...?

Go to last post
4

43photo

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Location
NL
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
2200 usd
2150 euros
This is serious money.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=34483294&page=1

Many on this forum asked olympus to built quality primes for 4/ 3rds. Many people are saying 4/ 3rds lacks primes.

Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000,=? Would you still buy one?

Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
 
43photo said:
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
2200 usd
2150 euros
This is serious money.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=34483294&page=1

Many on this forum asked olympus to built quality primes for 4/ 3rds. Many people are saying 4/ 3rds lacks primes.

Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000,=? Would you still buy one?

Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
Click to expand...
If the primes were small with the signature all-around Zuiko Digital quality, I'd spend that kind of money on a portrait prime - in the SHG range.

--
Tim
'I haven't been everywhere, but it's on my list.'
E3/7-14/12-60/35-100/150/50-200/25/EC14/EC20
http://www.flickr.com/photos/timskis6/
 
Interesting question. Back in my Nikon film days purchased a 24/2.8 and an 85/1.8 for about $350 each (inflation is one thing but this is sort of ridiculous). Is the new Nikon 24/1.4 worth $2200? Guess for some folks - maybe for professionals - but not for me.

I am very happy with Olympus's intermediate line of weather-sealed lenses. I'm a photo enthusiast but really can't justify paying $2000+ for a lens. Have a hard enough time convincing my wife on the $1000 for the other lenses.
 
It is one of the reasons I bought my Canon gear. It makes all the difference in the world especially on FF sensors.
--
Love of beauty is taste. The creation of beauty is art.- Ralph Waldo Emerson
 
43photo said:
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
2200 usd
2150 euros
This is serious money.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=34483294&page=1

Many on this forum asked olympus to built quality primes for 4/ 3rds. Many people are saying 4/ 3rds lacks primes.

Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000,=? Would you still buy one?

Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
Click to expand...
Are really what Olympus needs to be going after. Those F2 zooms are engineering marvels and, as many say, like having a few primes packed together, but the truth is they are far from affordable. Add to that the fact that they are large and heavy!

Considering 4/3s is a system built around a smaller sensor in order to achieve telecentricity, Olympus should really make a whole line of small, fast, affordable primes. They seemed to be taking a step in the right direction with the pancake, but then nothing happened after that.

--
Raj Sarma
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rssarma
--
Follow me on Twitter: rssarma

Olympus enthusiasts from NYC Metro, join UKPSG:
http://snipurl.com/crc3n
 
I would prefer decent quality (SG or HG) primes to maintain a small, sharp, fast kit, with primes, with optionally a large, fast 'professional' kit with the SHG zooms. I have a Sigma 30/1.4 on my camera now, and it has pretty much stayed there since I got it. I doubt I would do the same with a 35-100 or something.

Fast primes and zooms are different lenses for different situations; it is not valid to say that fast zooms are equivalent to a bunch of primes, because sometimes you just need one small fast lens, not a bag full.

Cheers
--
--Wyatt
http://photos.digitalcave.ca
All images (c) unless otherwise specified, please ask me before editing.
 
I think Olympus can build very high quality primes for a lot less money. The 50mm f/2.0 is one of the sharpest pieces of glass made for any system and it only costs 1/4 as much as the new Nikon glass.

Why Olympus has not produced more fast primes is good question. They are easier to develop and cost less to produce than the SGH zooms. I own 2 SHG lenses and I am waiting for a quality 43mm f/1.4 (or faster) and a 70mm f/1.4 (or faster). If the HG 50mm f/2 ($500.00) is a good indicator then I expect SGH primes to run close to $1,000 a piece. My 85L for my Canon was almost $2,000.
 
Lens gets faster, price increases exponentially. From f2.8 on, each stop will cost you more. Leica's Noctilux-Summilux-Summicron-Elmar is a good example.

There's a price evolution chart for Leica 50mm Summilux on Rockwell's website:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f14.htm

I find it interesting. Apart from the inflation, the value of a lens increases with time as well, at least it's the case for Leica glasses. Old Nikkors maybe different because they are no longer fully supported by the new bodies.

Best Regards,
Tony
Soren47 said:
Interesting question. Back in my Nikon film days purchased a 24/2.8 and an 85/1.8 for about $350 each (inflation is one thing but this is sort of ridiculous). Is the new Nikon 24/1.4 worth $2200? Guess for some folks - maybe for professionals - but not for me.

I am very happy with Olympus's intermediate line of weather-sealed lenses. I'm a photo enthusiast but really can't justify paying $2000+ for a lens. Have a hard enough time convincing my wife on the $1000 for the other lenses.
Click to expand...
 
It should be fairly easy to make a very good 50mm f/2 for 4/3. But considering that's 100mm FoV wise, i suspect shorter lenses become much more harder and expensive to produce

say :
24mm f/1.4 -> 12mm f/1.4
35mm f/1.4 -> 17.5mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.4 -> 25mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.4 -> 42.5mm f/1.4

I would imagine they would cost an arm and a leg, not that the Canikon versions are by any means cheap, but the 4/3 versions should be at least cheaper (in theory).

They could at least bring out some f/2 version. While the 17mm f/2.8 pancake is cute, it's also a joke speed wise (for a prime).
 
not asking for wideopen IQ because oly zooms are as good as primes out there...but just for lots of light gathering and shallow dof. f1.4 and f1.2 in the 20-50mm range. im thinking more like the 50mm AFD/G 1.4 or the canon f1.2 glass which is sub 1K price territory

WM.
43photo said:
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
2200 usd
2150 euros
This is serious money.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1030&thread=34483294&page=1

Many on this forum asked olympus to built quality primes for 4/ 3rds. Many people are saying 4/ 3rds lacks primes.

Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000,=? Would you still buy one?

Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/mustafeez27
 
43photo said:
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
2200 usd
2150 euros
This is serious money.
Click to expand...
It is indeed, but many people will pay for it because its the only way to get what they want image wise.

Nikon were in desperate need to produce this lens as the absence of this type of offering and the availability of a Canon mount version has been a deciding factor for many to choose Canon over Nikon.

However, one needs to differentiate between this type of speciality fast prime, which people choose for ultra low light, and maximum subject isolation, as opposed to a small, light, lower cost prime with good optical properties. They are not the same target audience and shouldn't really be lumped together.

I don't think Olympus users are EVER going to get the former, but the latter makes a lot of sense for the system and I can understand people really clamouring for these lenses.
 
This is one of the few things that has tempted me to switch brands, though i must admit i'm viewing it from the other end of the spectrum, being on a student's budget.

If canon and nikon can build a 50mm f1.8 that is relatively small and gives decent IQ for $100, why cant olympus do something comparable? id be happy if it was out there for twice the price, but the closest i can think of is the 28mm 2.8 which is both a little too wide, a little too slow, and still more expensive, or the 35mm 3.5 which would be great...if it weren't 3.5. then of course theres the sigma, which is as close as it gets to what id like. but made by olympus.

am i asking too much? I think olympus really needs a pair of reasonably priced equivalents to the 50 and 85mm primes, either SG or HG.
 
But if Oly, for some bizarre reason, does not wish to develop them, then they can take a cue from Pentax and implement at least built-in AF confirm for manual lenses. I'd be happy enough to source for my own vintage prime solutions from Zeiss or Takumar if they can at least adopt that system.

I hate to admit it, but one of the reasons I was contemplating a switch to C, N at one time was due to the lack of primes. Their choices are staggering to say the least, with the 85mm units looking so tempting. But I wouldn't trade Oly colors and bodies for the world, at least for now. So here's hoping that Oly can do smthng about the primes deprivation rather than force us to turn to Sigma or adapt manual lenses which are so hard to focus wide open.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob_chan/

'All men will die, but few have truly lived'
 
Quality fix focals need not be expensive fix focals, let's distingfuish that.

For the bulk, weight and price of the f/2.0 zoom, would it be so that a 14mm/2.0 would be much smaller, and of course something like a 28/2.0 for the standard, and say a 70/2.0 for the nominal Tele, and we can add the ZD 50 macro ( already available ) for portrait.

--
  • Franka -
 
43photo said:
Many on this forum asked olympus to built quality primes for 4/ 3rds. Many people are saying 4/ 3rds lacks primes.

Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000,=? Would you still buy one?
Click to expand...
well i want fast f1.4 portrait primes, circa 40mm (80mm in old money)...these should be less (circa 900 pounds) and yes i would buy.
43photo said:
Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
Click to expand...
i have both the 14-35/2 and the 35-100/2, but would prefer some f1.4 primes, especially in the portrait zone......it's all academic in any case - they're not interested, the R&D budget is going on micro and that's it. At least it makes the roadmap easy to read.
 
I prefer lenses that are good, useful, and cheap, regardless of whether they are primes or zooms.

Olympus seems to have a pretty good track record making zooms that are good, useful, and cheap (for how good they are). If there's some function that would be served better with a prime, then make one. But I think that for a given amount of manufacturing resources, making high quality zooms contributes more to the system than making high quality primes.

Some people might disagree, particularly people who need very fast apertures in focal lengths other than 24/1.8, 30/1.4, and 50/1.4. But at least for my purposes, I'm glad that there are good quality zooms for sale. Some people have a camera, a 12-60, and a 50-200, and that's all they'll ever want.
 
Yet it does make me chuckle about the hundreds of threads where people are demanding a boat load of fast, small, cheap, weather sealed, primes for 4/3rds.

Dreaming is free. Sure, I want more primes, and Nikon just showed us that it's possible (and that we need to get real about the cost).

Olympus may have an advantage in cost and size because they are designing for a sensor that is 1/4th the area. I hope they leverage that reality, and I hope it's affordable.

Cheers,
Seth

--
What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?

--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com
 
43photo said:
Nikon just released a fantastic prime 24mm 1.4.
Click to expand...
.....
43photo said:
Do you still prefer olympus to built high quality primes when you know they would cost around 2000......
Click to expand...
Yup. The more - the better.
43photo said:
Or do you prefer a SHG zoom at f2.0 that gives you a handful of primes at the same price?
Click to expand...
I prefer having both. Sorta kinda like Nikon users do, given that 99% of the new 24/1.4 buyers will be people who already own a 24-70.

What sort of thread is this anyway ? Sounds like "Do you prefer your favorite car brand to build only sport cars, or sport cars and SUV's ???"
 
SirSeth said:
Dreaming is free. Sure, I want more primes, and Nikon just showed us that it's possible (and that we need to get real about the cost).
Click to expand...
Well if you're wondering about the cost in general Canon has a fleet of premium primes for reference :

135mm f/2 L - 1000$
85mm f/1.2 L - 2000$
50mm f/1.2 L - 1500$
35mm f/1.4 L - 1400$
24mm f/1.4 L - 1700$
14mm f/2.8 L - 2100$
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top