Reading mode: Light Dark

Why aren't zoom lenses faster?

Go to last post
D

Daniel Spiljar

Active member
Messages
67
Reaction score
148
Location
Vaxholm, SE
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
 
I’m guessing weight, expense and limited market.

Panasonic offer the 10-25/1.7 and 25-50/1.7m which sort of fit the above. They do fit a particular market segment but people also use them for stills. There are f2 FF zoom lenses.

Nothing seems to reach f2 at 100mm MFT equivalent.

Andrew
 
Daniel Spiljar said:
  • Daniel Spiljar wrote:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Size, weight and cost. But one can argue that the mft f2.8 12-40 and 40-150 offer more range at the expense of just a little speed...

But I would welcome faster alternatives next to the wonderful compact f4's, even if that means less range.

But I'd settle for WS f1.4 versions of the 25/45/75 primes (more compact than the f1.2's)
 
Last edited:
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Have and occasionally use the 35-100 and 150 prime. Still lovely optics and focus pretty well on the better bodies, e.g., E-M1iii and OM-1. They even access subject detection.

Compared to native m4/3 they focus slowly and have much lower maximum frame rates, so a narrower performance envelope, but both have "the look."

If Panny wanted to release, say, a 50-125/1.7 I'd be very tempted. The other 1.7 zooms aren't all that appealing to me since there are faster primes within the range.

Cheers,

Rick
 
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Sigma makes a DC 50-100/1.8 internal focus/zoom lens in EF mount. As a DC lens it has an aps-c image circle. It can be directly adapted to M4/3 with an electronic adapter or focal reduced to put the full aps-c image circle on the 4/3 sensor fro approx 35-70/1.3

It is a rather large heavy expensive lens but does give S-AF on Panasonic bodies.
 
7Artisans make quite acceptable 25mm 35mm and 50mm f0.95 MF (only lenses) at reasonable prices. Rival TTArtisans also has a selection of similar very fast lenses. Also try Meike.
 
Skeeterbytes said:
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Have and occasionally use the 35-100 and 150 prime. Still lovely optics and focus pretty well on the better bodies, e.g., E-M1iii and OM-1. They even access subject detection.

Compared to native m4/3 they focus slowly and have much lower maximum frame rates, so a narrower performance envelope, but both have "the look."

If Panny wanted to release, say, a 50-125/1.7 I'd be very tempted. The other 1.7 zooms aren't all that appealing to me since there are faster primes within the range.

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
I have the 25-50/1.7 - it is a very good lens but quite large and relatively light for its physical size. Breaking tradition with no lens IS. Similarly the 10-25/1.7 and 9/1.7 which seem to be following a pattern of great, rather large, lenses of relatively light weight without lens IS.

All truly well built of course.

Maybe it is a series and your 50-125/1.7 would be the next logical step.
 
Tom Caldwell said:
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Sigma makes a DC 50-100/1.8 internal focus/zoom lens in EF mount. As a DC lens it has an aps-c image circle. It can be directly adapted to M4/3 with an electronic adapter or focal reduced to put the full aps-c image circle on the 4/3 sensor fro approx 35-70/1.3

It is a rather large heavy expensive lens but does give S-AF on Panasonic bodies.
Click to expand...
 
I don't know if you've ever had the opportunity to hold an m43 body with an old 4/3 lens on it, but they are generally massive. There is definitely a feeling of unbalance when you want one of these on an m43 body. Especially one of the zooms, and you have to factor in the adapter as well.

That being said, the 35-100f2.0 is the best, sharpest lens I've probably used on any format camera ever, prime or otherwise. It has a character to it that really can't be described. That being said I think I can only get about seven or eight frames per second out of it with AF, and it is a behemoth and is rather unwieldy for the focal length it covers. But it's worth it because it renders beautifully. I actually use it for portraits because I left the way it renders people and backgrounds. And it works great on my em1s, but terribly on anything without phase detect.

So yes, I would love see some fast high-end f2 0 tele zooms. But the market isn't there for them, I don't think. And even Canon is going as low as f7.1 on their L series zooms, so as cameras are able to now handle higher iso speed, the lenses are getting a little bit slower, it may be even a little bit optically less pure, as in camera Corrections can compensate for a lot of glass compromises.
 
Tom Caldwell said:
Skeeterbytes said:
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
Have and occasionally use the 35-100 and 150 prime. Still lovely optics and focus pretty well on the better bodies, e.g., E-M1iii and OM-1. They even access subject detection.

Compared to native m4/3 they focus slowly and have much lower maximum frame rates, so a narrower performance envelope, but both have "the look."

If Panny wanted to release, say, a 50-125/1.7 I'd be very tempted. The other 1.7 zooms aren't all that appealing to me since there are faster primes within the range.

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
I have the 25-50/1.7 - it is a very good lens but quite large and relatively light for its physical size. Breaking tradition with no lens IS. Similarly the 10-25/1.7 and 9/1.7 which seem to be following a pattern of great, rather large, lenses of relatively light weight without lens IS.

All truly well built of course.

Maybe it is a series and your 50-125/1.7 would be the next logical step.
Click to expand...
 
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
The lenses were designed when the 4/3 sensors maxed out at around ISO 800 to 1600 and were very noisy at those levels. They were also intended to meet the "bag full of primes with 2 lenses) idea: rather than carry half a dozen fast primes, 2 lenses could cover EFL 28-200 mm.

Now, sensors go to much higher ISO and between improvements in the sensor, the imaging engine, and AI processing software the need for such fast lenses is greatly reduced. Even the argument that the need for shallower DoF is obviated in part by computational processing, or the f1.2 PRO trio for that matter.

Still, these lenses do have a particular image rendering that many find hard to match.
 
Daniel Spiljar said:
The old Four Thirds system had two remarkably fast zoom lenses made by Olympus, namely the ED 14-35mm 1:2.0 SWD and the ED 35-100mm 1:2.0.

Does anybody use them adapted on a more modern MFT body?

Why the maximum aperture of more recent lenses for the same sensor size generally doesn't exceed 1:2.8?
Click to expand...
I think that the clue is in the name, micro. Ain’t nothing micro about an f2 35100 that weighs in >4X the weight of the fabulous Panasonic 35-100 for the sake of a single stop!
 
It is a masterpiece of a lens.

However, despite being an incredible lens, I sold mine recently, when Panasonic came out with the 9mm prime. I basically bought the 10-25 for the 10mm F1.7, which was the widest fast glass in the MFT universe without going manual focus or fisheye. I sold it because it was so big, I found myself not wanting to include it in the bag for walkarounds, when I could still do quite well with the F2.8 zooms which were quite compact by comparison, even if none of them were quite as flawless as the 10-25. Once I could just throw in a tiny 9mm F1.7 into the bag just in case the situation arose, it was game over for my 10-25

I cannot speak to the old F2 olympus zooms, but I think they are of limited usefulness with adapters when it comes to autofocus, and are probably even larger and more unwieldy than the 10-25.

Honestly, as high iso has become so good with the latest OM cameras, I think the niche of big bulky, extra expensive F2 zooms has become too small for the manufacturers to waste time and R&D on appealing to.

But seriously, the 10-25 is fantastic if that is what you are into, and I would assume the matching 25-50 is equally great.
 
TowheeTail said:
It is a masterpiece of a lens.

However, despite being an incredible lens, I sold mine recently, when Panasonic came out with the 9mm prime. I basically bought the 10-25 for the 10mm F1.7, which was the widest fast glass in the MFT universe without going manual focus or fisheye.
Click to expand...
It depends on whether or not the Sigma DC series can be included in the MFT Universe.

Students of the Sigma DC in EF mount can find some exotic lenses that are/were not available in M4/3 mount. DC of course is aps-c image circle and Sigma did not do the EF-S mount but stayed with EF mount specifications. Consequentially they can be focal reduced and they all do S-AF fine.

Focal reduced aps-c image circle lenses put slightly more than the full made image circle on the 4/3 sensor.

The 8-16/4.5-5.6 might not be the fastest corrected wide zoom in the pack but it might arguably be the widest when focal reduced: 5.6-11.2/3.0-4.0 (approx). Its only real issue apart from usual size/weight/cost and need for an electronic adapter is that it can vignette the fixed hood petals. But before we reach for the Dremel grinder - if you switch to 3:2 capture format the vignette disappears.

It is a quite good performer.
TowheeTail said:
I sold it because it was so big,
Click to expand...
Yes the 8-16 is fairly big, if somewhat smaller than the 10-25, but also quite heavy.
TowheeTail said:
I found myself not wanting to include it in the bag for walkarounds, when I could still do quite well with the F2.8 zooms which were quite compact by comparison, even if none of them were quite as flawless as the 10-25. Once I could just throw in a tiny 9mm F1.7 into the bag just in case the situation arose, it was game over for my 10-25

I cannot speak to the old F2 olympus zooms, but I think they are of limited usefulness with adapters when it comes to autofocus, and are probably even larger and more unwieldy than the 10-25.

Honestly, as high iso has become so good with the latest OM cameras, I think the niche of big bulky, extra expensive F2 zooms has become too small for the manufacturers to waste time and R&D on appealing to.

But seriously, the 10-25 is fantastic if that is what you are into, and I would assume the matching 25-50 is equally great.
Click to expand...
I don't have the 10-25 but agree that the 25-50 is an excellent lens. It is also fairly light for its physical size. The physical size does not worry me - I have smaller lenses for when physical size needs to be more compact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
High speed telephoto lenses or lack of them
2 3
Replies
58
Views
12K
Tom Caldwell
T
Erin_Pisces
  • Question Question
Lumix G9 + Viltrox EF-M2 II + Sigma Art 18-35mm?
Replies
3
Views
1K
HicHic
HicHic
S
How far things have come
Replies
15
Views
762
Bernard de Clairvaux
B
bluevellet
  • User review User review
The Little Engine That Could
Replies
14
Views
5K
Isola Verde
Isola Verde
MJ_Photo38
Which premium standard zoom to get?
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
14K
Kevin Stephens
K

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