Reading mode: Light Dark

Why does M4/3 have 6 slow kit zooms ?

Go to last post
They are expensive. I keep thinking I'd really like the 12-35/2.8 for travel when changing lenses doesn't work well for variety of reasons. My 24-70L was my workhorse lens for years for travel, though exceedingly big and heavy on a FF and carried with at least 2 fast primes.. I'd like the same for m4/3 but prefer primes still. I have the 20 and the 45/2.8 and carry the original 14-45 (as well as the ZD 9-18), so I may end up adding another prime and bypassing the zoom. All depends upon price, quality of lens---and if I want to invest that much in yet another lens for m4/3 with so much happening camera wise.

Diane
SF Photo Gal said:
Fast zooms are expensive. When Oly put out their 45 f1.8 and it was SRP'd at $399, OMG the moaning and gnashing of teeth. Personally, I thought it was a bargain.

A good fast zoom will run about $1,000. I can image the complaining over that. For less than $1000 I have a 45 f1.8, 20 f1.7, 14 f2.5, so I'm happy.

SF Photo Gal aka Queer Chick
Canon 1DsIII & 5DII/Panasonic GH1-GF1-LX3
Click to expand...
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38647240@N00/
 
This one looks pretty darn fast to me. A constant f/2.0 zoom -- finally, a zoom lens that you can use in low-light video. I am not sure how many constant f/2.0 zooms does the Canikon Group have between them?

Of course, it would have been so much sweeter if this was going from say 12mm to 35mm. As it is, we've got a 14-35mm zoom range here, so in FF 135 term, that would be a 28-70mm zoom. Wide angle to very mild tele, but alas, no UWA. That is where the SLR Magic 12mm/f/1.6 comes in nicely. Now there are M4/3 primes at f/0.95 and at least one M4/3 zoom at f/2.0. Not too shabby, really.

Just by looking at it, this looks like the "old-school" zoom design with the front barrel traveling in & out, but with such a short focal range, it would not be too bad. Any idea when this one will ship here in the USA? From Olympus, zoom choices would now be a fast 14-35mm manual zoom or a slow 12-50mm internal design, motorized zoom. I believe the 14-35mm/f/2.0 might cost a lot more than the 12-50mm will, right?
 


New 14-35mm constant f/2.0 zoom from Olympus. Fast.

In my book, "FAST" lenses are those with f/2.0 maximum open apertures, and wider. For the M4/3 form factor, today these include primes and zooms in the f/0.95 to f/2.0 range.

"SLOW" lenses are all those higher than f/2.0, although I might consider an f/2.5 to be a fast lens, depending on what it can deliver and how well.

Other than some cheap plastic stock lenses, there is really no reason for any lens to be slower than f/2.8, whether prime or zoom.
 
The funny thing with this lens is that the final version is actually smaller than the prototypes. They were showing mock-ups and prototypes early on and people complained how large and heavy it was; the lens was eventually delayed over a year for them to make it smaller.
Joe Ogiba said:
Click to expand...
 
Gregm61 said:
I can't really see anyone buying this lens with a micro four-thirds system in mind as the primary use.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/546539-REG/Olympus_261011_14_35mm_f_2_0_ED_SWD.html
Click to expand...
Agreed. But apparently, Olympus can. They swindled away too many billions already to stop now.

There is that old adage about a sucker being born every minute of every day, but based on the 23 most enthusiastic user reviews on B&H, and the highest 5-star rating, lots of M4/3 shooters out there did not flinch at the rather shocking $2,300 price.

Using APS-C sensor image circle glass (like those for Nikon DX sensor coverage) with a $20 Nikon F-mount to M4/3 camera lens mount adapter sounds better and better by the hour, folks. A heckuva lot cheaper, too.
 
And I don't understand why so many people think the only market for m43 is P&S upgraders. That seems to be who Oly is targeting, with their style-first cameras, but the GH series from Panasonic is anything but that.

Maybe that's why Panasonic has announced a pair of fast zooms, while Oly introduces yet another slow one.

As for physics, a 12 to 35 that covers only m43 will be much, much smaller than an equivalent focal length for APS or FF.
 
Francis Carver said:
Gregm61 said:
I can't really see anyone buying this lens with a micro four-thirds system in mind as the primary use.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/546539-REG/Olympus_261011_14_35mm_f_2_0_ED_SWD.html
Click to expand...
Agreed. But apparently, Olympus can. They swindled away too many billions already to stop now.

There is that old adage about a sucker being born every minute of every day, but based on the 23 most enthusiastic user reviews on B&H, and the highest 5-star rating, lots of M4/3 shooters out there did not flinch at the rather shocking $2,300 price.
Click to expand...
I would imagine the vast majority of those 23 reviews were not from micro four-thirds users. I can see one or two recent ones are, but the 14-35mm f2 is made for the regular four-thirds DSLR system. E3, E30 and E5 DSLR's are the bodies where most of these are being used.
 
Bob Meyer said:
And I don't understand why so many people think the only market for m43 is P&S upgraders. That seems to be who Oly is targeting, with their style-first cameras, but the GH series from Panasonic is anything but that.
Click to expand...
I think that's because they all include Iauto everything and scene modes which include "pet" and "baby" modes. There is additional control for those that will use it but there is no doubt who the target market is, you only have to watch the ads over here, youngsters shooting each other one handed with the lcd flapping in the wind.
Bob Meyer said:
Maybe that's why Panasonic has announced a pair of fast zooms, while Oly introduces yet another slow one.
Click to expand...
Whether they are "fast" remains to be seen.
Bob Meyer said:
As for physics, a 12 to 35 that covers only m43 will be much, much smaller than an equivalent focal length for APS or FF.
Click to expand...
True but how much smaller? that will depend on the speed, my money's on F2.8-F4 at best and I hope I'm wrong.
--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
 
Gregm61 said:
I would imagine the vast majority of those 23 reviews were not from micro four-thirds users. I can see one or two recent ones are, but the 14-35mm f2 is made for the regular four-thirds DSLR system. E3, E30 and E5 DSLR's are the bodies where most of these are being used.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for pointing this out, Greg. Frankly, I am still flabbergasted how they have "4/3" and M4/3," and how next to impossible it is to distinguish one from the other for the likes of me, the uninitiated. If I had a buck for every poor M4/3 camera owner who "upgraded" to a better lens, only to find out that he/she had gotten a 4/3 lens instead of a M4/3 lens, and that the adapter to make the thing fit the M4/3 body costs anywhere from $150 to many hundreds of dollars, wow!!

Frankly, after the mess that Olympus had created, they should be giving away a TOTALLY FREE!!! adapter with every 4/3 lens they sell, so that people can use the thing on their M4/3 cameras. But they are apparently even making money on something like that, wow. Sad, more than anything, really.

BTW, isn't this the same company that had somehow swindled itself out of billions of dollars? If it is, then I understand the reason why they are charging high prices for the 4/3 to M4/3 adapter. Gotta make up the losses somehow.
 
You mean it makes no sense FOR YOU. It obvioiusly makes sense to some, since Panasonic has announced 2 fast zooms. I can't wait for the 12-35 'fast' zoom, and think it makes lots of sense for m43. I'll pair it with my GH2, which is plenty high-spec'd.

Honestly, your comments are non-sensical. A high quality lens will enhance any camera, not just "high spec'd" ones. An m43 body with a native 12-35 f 2.8 will still be dramatically smaller than a 7D and 17-55 2.8.

Really, stop assuming that what you want is what everyone else should want, too.
Jogger said:
Fast zooms are generally event/PJ lenses.. i.e. professional, working lenses.. they need to be paired with an equally high spec'd body to make the most out of, not to mention balance properly.

What you are asking for makes no sense for m43.

If you need a fast zoom, then get a D7000/7D or higher SLR.
Kopend05 said:
Olympus 14-42mm Mk 1 - Mk3
Olympus 14-45mm + 14-42mm and 14-42mm x zoom lenses

All in 2.5 yrs of development , where are the fast zooms ? Olympus newest 12-60mm zoom lens ,again very slow and why ?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I am now beginning to think that the so-called "REAL CAMERAS" and optics matching them natively actually start at the APS-C sensor format cameras and lenses covering the APS-C sensor's image circle. And then, of course, for those that need this, go up to full-frame 135 and medium formats.

But the really, really pricey Pentax Q with its total of 4 lenses and 1/2.3-inch sensor, and these off-beat M4/3 jobs, sometime it is hard to take them seriously.
 
It's an intersting question. I dont' know how much it costs to design and manufacture a new lens. I would speculate the R&D costs for a large bright zoom can be anywhere between $1 million and $1 billion. I would assume they have software that can simulate the lens design and calculate the components cost. Then one need to estimate the potential profits and see if that makes sense. So, based on lack of those lenses, I would assume that lens category is not very financially attractive to the manufacturers.
Kopend05 said:
Olympus 14-42mm Mk 1 - Mk3
Olympus 14-45mm + 14-42mm and 14-42mm x zoom lenses

All in 2.5 yrs of development , where are the fast zooms ? Olympus newest 12-60mm zoom lens ,again very slow and why ?
Click to expand...
 
Francis Carver said:
I am now beginning to think that the so-called "REAL CAMERAS" and optics matching them natively actually start at the APS-C sensor format cameras and lenses covering the APS-C sensor's image circle. And then, of course, for those that need this, go up to full-frame 135 and medium formats.

But the really, really pricey Pentax Q with its total of 4 lenses and 1/2.3-inch sensor, and these off-beat M4/3 jobs, sometime it is hard to take them seriously.
Click to expand...
You need to look at the primes. You could buy the EPL-1, 14mm F2.5, 20mm F1.7 and 45mm F1.8, add the vf2 evf (if you need it ) and probably still have change out of $1000. For IQ that's a pretty hard package to beat unless your a regular high ISO shooter (not static subjects but for movement). All three of those lenses are extremely sharp and you can make some excellent large prints from the whole package. You could also carry the lot in a small bag or even a few pockets.

Yes you could buy a small DSLR for a few hundred dollars but you'd have a hard time matching the quality of those primes for close to the price, if you could even find comparable lenses.
--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
 
SF Photo Gal said:
Fast zooms are expensive. When Oly put out their 45 f1.8 and it was SRP'd at $399, OMG the moaning and gnashing of teeth. Personally, I thought it was a bargain.

A good fast zoom will run about $1,000. I can image the complaining over that. For less than $1000 I have a 45 f1.8, 20 f1.7, 14 f2.5, so I'm happy.
Click to expand...
Expensive? No doubt. But I think the 12 2.0, 20 1.7 and 45 1.8 would total more. Yes, they cover more range and are somewhat faster (I'm guessing, since we don't have the specs on the Panny zoom yet), but also require multiple lens changes to get the same shots. If you're shooting static subjects that's not an issue, but if your subjects are moving, even slowly, you may miss the shot completely. And those 3 lenses probably weigh as much, and take up more room in a bag, than the 12-35mm zoom will.

As with everything else, it's about trade-offs. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to want a fast zoom, and while it will be large compared to a slow zoom or prime, it won't be big or heavy compared to the several primes needed to cover the same range. Assuming the 12-35 is high quality, and not absurdly priced, I'll buy one once the initial demand is met and prices fall a little.
 
The simple fact that the lens only has to cover 1/4 the sensor area will allow it to be a lot smaller. Assuming Panasonic implements software correction, as with most m43 lenses, and it can be smaller still. I don't think a fixed 2.8 is too much to expect. If it's 2.8-4, I'll probably not be interested, unless it's a bargain price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
How far things have come
Replies
15
Views
154
Bernard de Clairvaux
B
S
Why do I prefer zoom lenses over primes on M43?
2
Replies
27
Views
93
SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany
SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany
V
Orkney (Scotland) with M4/3
Replies
2
Views
32
19andrew47
19andrew47
D
A Month With the 50-200mm/f2.8 lens
Replies
2
Views
4K
DaveLBlack
D
MJ_Photo38
Which premium standard zoom to get?
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
1K
Asherax
Asherax

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