0ursisthefury
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 265
- Reaction score
- 63
Obviously it will be much bigger but I don’t think most people would mind.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Think there will ever be a f1.4 zoom for mft?
- Thread starter 0ursisthefury
- Start date
Minstadave
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 450
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 512
Would seem very unlikely.
jrharvey592
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 343
- Reaction score
- 271
Would love to see something like this but it would probably cost 2-3k dollars. For now I love my sigma 18-35 with a speedbooster which gives roughly F1.2 with 24-50 equivalant focal length.
drj3
Forum Pro
The FTs 14-35 f2 weighed 915 grams ( you can probably get one used). An f1.4 would probably weigh twice as much.
Henry Stamm
Senior Member
Depending on the FL covered, it would be from "much bigger" to huge.
Further, it would be very pricey. For example, the Olympus 4/3 SHG 90-250 f2.8 lens (which I would dearly love to own) was $6000 US or thereabouts and still brings well above $3000 on the used market. Take a gander at it and imagine a micro 4/3 version in f1.4. I doubt seriously if it would be any smaller or weigh less.Henry Stamm
Senior Member
Further thoughts: Olympus made 4/3 SHG 14-35 f2 and 35-100 f2. I own both of these. I bought both of them used, too. One was just under $1000 US and the other was around $1500-1800 US and both cost far more when new. They are big, heavy lenses and I use them constantly with my em1mk2.
That said, I would like to see both lenses introduced in the the micro 4/3 universe. I would hope they would be a bit smaller and lighter, but I'm sure they will still be big & heavy compared to the current f2.8 offerings in those FL. And pricey. f1.4 versions would cost quite a bit more and would be huge.
Jacques Cornell
Forum Pro
I doubt it. The market would be tiny, as the lens would be huge and expensive. If I wanted that, I'd get a Sony a7III and an f2.8 zoom. As it is, I use three (nicely inexpensive) bodies with bright primes instead.
Skeeterbytes
Forum Pro
This is the paradigm, and while there are a few obvious ways to shave weight from the SHG if you then add a full stop it ends being even bigger. Helps to recall that 4/3 was very zoom-centric, lacking the vast m4/3 prime collection and it is that which eliminates the need for uber-fast zooms.
Cheers,
Rick
G1Houston
Senior Member
If any one need better noise control and shallower DOF, go to APSC or FF.
I’m clearly not advocating f1.4 but I like I said, I think with correction and current design I think the could make F1.8 at a usable size.
This one is a strong contestant for the Most Useless Post Weekly Award.
SergeyFromMoscow
Forum Enthusiast
I think it would be impractical - going to f/1.4 increases size, weight and complicates optical design much-much faster, than just making lens light circle larger for bigger sensor.
Last edited:
Jacques Cornell
Forum Pro
Or just use a bright prime.
Astrotripper
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 8,676
- Solutions
- 14
- Reaction score
- 12,107
Here's my 12.5-25mm f/1.3 zoom on E-M1 Mark II
This is actually the heaviest lens I own, dwarfing both Oly 12-100 and Panny 100-300 II by a large margin.
So, if you like your short standard zoom to be the weight of a telephoto zoom like the Oly 40-150mm f/2.8...
And imagine how much it would cost if Olympus made it. $2000? $3000?
So no, I do not think there will ever be a native f/1.4 zoom for MFT.
I don't even think there will ever be a zoom faster than f/2.8. Although if by some black magic Olympus or Panasonic could make a reasonably sized 12-35mm f/2 or similar for less than $1500, maybe that's something that could make sense and be sellable. After all, Nikon's 24-70/4 for Z is 500g and $1000. That would be a reference point for any such lens for Micro 4/3.
--
My photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrotripper2000/
This is actually the heaviest lens I own, dwarfing both Oly 12-100 and Panny 100-300 II by a large margin.
So, if you like your short standard zoom to be the weight of a telephoto zoom like the Oly 40-150mm f/2.8...
And imagine how much it would cost if Olympus made it. $2000? $3000?
So no, I do not think there will ever be a native f/1.4 zoom for MFT.
I don't even think there will ever be a zoom faster than f/2.8. Although if by some black magic Olympus or Panasonic could make a reasonably sized 12-35mm f/2 or similar for less than $1500, maybe that's something that could make sense and be sellable. After all, Nikon's 24-70/4 for Z is 500g and $1000. That would be a reference point for any such lens for Micro 4/3.
--
My photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrotripper2000/
Not sure if one will be made for µ4/3, but I am sure one will be built eventually. Lens technology seems to be advancing at a pretty good rate recently due to the combination of available computer power to run calculations, and improvements in manufacturing technology (especially aspherical elements). Given free reign with selection of glass and aspherical conic profiles and the number of required elements to get a sharp lens drops dramatically. I would not be surprised to see a first party f/2 zoom for µ4/3 the same size and quality as the 12-40mm in about a decades time, but those sorts of predictions should never be counted on. A f/1.4 zoom would defiantly be something that someone could make, but the question is if anyone would make it for µ4/3; by the time it becomes completely reasonable to make (Sigma might make a huge f/1.4 zoom for some format, but it seems unlikely for a µ4/3 first party), camera technology might look very different.
john isaacs
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 10,441
- Solutions
- 22
- Reaction score
- 9,913
I had those lenses, but sold them. I couldn't see putting such large heavy lenses on m43 bodies, when similar size/weight/cost lenses in f/2.8 could be put on a FF body.
Great Bustard
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 45,961
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 34,046
Won't a Sigma 18-35 / 1.8 and/or Sigma 50-100 / 1.8 with a 0.7x focal reducer (speed booster) do the trick?
Last edited:
glassoholic
Veteran Member
Nice... just how good or bad is it for SAF and CAF? A Metabones 0.74x I presume?Here's my 12.5-25mm f/1.3 zoom on E-M1 Mark II
This is actually the heaviest lens I own, dwarfing both Oly 12-100 and Panny 100-300 II by a large margin.
So, if you like your short standard zoom to be the weight of a telephoto zoom like the Oly 40-150mm f/2.8...
And imagine how much it would cost if Olympus made it. $2000? $3000?
So no, I do not think there will ever be a native f/1.4 zoom for MFT.
I don't even think there will ever be a zoom faster than f/2.8. Although if by some black magic Olympus or Panasonic could make a reasonably sized 12-35mm f/2 or similar for less than $1500, maybe that's something that could make sense and be sellable. After all, Nikon's 24-70/4 for Z is 500g and $1000. That would be a reference point for any such lens for Micro 4/3.
--
My photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrotripper2000/
--
M43 equivalence: "Twice the fun with half the weight"
"You are a long time dead" -
Credit to whoever said that first and my wife for saying it to me. Make the best you can of every day!
I agree, it would be huge, and heavy. Sigma had released several fast f/1.8 zooms for crop sensors like the 50-100 f/1.8 which had really great optics, and was well constructed. But, the market for those are real small even for both DSLR makers. Nevertheless, their 18-35 f/1.8 was a huge hit with a speed booster during the GH4 era.
Thus, going f/1.4 is a stretch even for Sigma.
There may be some used Canon f/1.4 video lenses on the market. But I don't know how legit they are.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum