2.5 years later, where are the fast lenses?

[mfbernstein]

It seems the m4/3 finally is getting a decent foothold. I've been seeing more and more Pens and Panasonics out on the trail recently and just yesterday I saw somebody shooting at an event with a GH2.

Still, it's been 2 1/2 years since m4/3 came out and by my count there are only 2 native lenses faster than f/2.8 (Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5). The situation is even worse with the zooms - there's only one constant aperture zoom (the 7-14/4) and no native zoom faster than f/3.5. Obviously m4/3 isn't aimed at the high-end yet, but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C. Considering that the sensors are 1-1 1/3 stops worse, that would mean 1-stop faster zooms, that would mean something like a 14-42/2.5-4.0 to equal an 18-55/3.5-5.6.

I like my E-P2 and 20/1.7 a lot, but it's getting frustrating waiting for good native lenses, like a portrait prime or a high quality standard zoom. The prices have also remained quite high on the consumer lenses. I'm sure the Olympus 75-300 is a decent lens, but $800 for a lens that hits f/6.7 at the long end is a bit hard to swallow.

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[nzmacro]

You mentioned the word "Native" and thats not why I got into 4/3. I got into it because they accept non native lenses so well. We don't all need auto focus and IS, maybe thats for you, but not for a lot of us.

What does a 300mm F/2.8 cost for that Nikon of yours with autofocus and IS. I already know the answer and thats just not for me, neither is Canon's 200mm F/2.8 auto IS, or maybe you don't consider those fast lenses. On 4/3 those lenses are a lot more affordable. Auto focus and IS native lenses, no thanks. We don't need to add adaptors with cheap glass to use them either, just a std adaptor with no glass does the trick.

Danny.
...........................
4/3 macro

http://www.macrophotos.com/g2macro

http://www.macrophotos.com
...........................
Worry about the image that comes out of the box, rather than the box itself.

 

[Alexsfo]

There is only Panny 20mm f1.7 and the upcoming Panasonic 25mm f1.4

Olympus has never released a fast digital prime so I don't count much on them (the fastest they've done was the infamous ZD 50mm f2 macro lens). I am quite puzzled by the lack of fast primes too but it's not like other mirrorless systems have them either (NX & NEX).
--
E-PL2; 20mm f1.7, 14mm f2.5, 14-150mm f4-5.6, ZD 50mm f2

 

[Gregm61]

It seems the m4/3 finally is getting a decent foothold. I've been seeing more and more Pens and Panasonics out on the trail recently and just yesterday I saw somebody shooting at an event with a GH2.

Still, it's been 2 1/2 years since m4/3 came out and by my count there are only 2 native lenses faster than f/2.8 (Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5). The situation is even worse with the zooms - there's only one constant aperture zoom (the 7-14/4) and no native zoom faster than f/3.5. Obviously m4/3 isn't aimed at the high-end yet, but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C. Considering that the sensors are 1-1 1/3 stops worse, that would mean 1-stop faster zooms, that would mean something like a 14-42/2.5-4.0 to equal an 18-55/3.5-5.6.

I like my E-P2 and 20/1.7 a lot, but it's getting frustrating waiting for good native lenses, like a portrait prime or a high quality standard zoom. The prices have also remained quite high on the consumer lenses. I'm sure the Olympus 75-300 is a decent lens, but $800 for a lens that hits f/6.7 at the long end is a bit hard to swallow.

I think as far as Olympus is concerned, they've gone just the opposite direction of 4/3rd's, where there was such a noise in part about how the better lenses and bodies were not that much smaller/if at all than the larger format systems, and smaller size was part of their stated reasoning in going with the smaller sensor. In the case of micro 4/3rd's, "micro" seems to be the key word, with smallest possible the primary specification for everything, at the cost of anything fast.

The 75-300 as you note is a hard sell with the speed and price. It's just not going to be a lens they are going to sell many of and I would imagine they figured that, but from what I have seen, it's also a substantially better lens than the 4/3rd's 70-300 optically and focus speed-wise, the difference makes the 4/3rd's 70-300 a joke. The glass is pretty darn exotic and it appears tack sharp at 300mm and f6.7, which is more than can be said of the 70-300 4/3rd's lens at 300mm and f5.6. As soon as I am in a position to, I will be buying the micro 75-300.

With an outfit this small and light (in my case, the E-PL1, 20/1.7 Panny, 14-42II and 40-150 for now), carrying something like a monopod or my new Manfrotto carbon fiber tripod that weighs about what my Olympus 50-200 SWD alone weighs, is nothing compared to the backpack filled with the E5 outfit I've been carrying, and the quality can be as good if you just use the extra bit of care in stabilizing the outfit when you shoot at the necessary lower shutter speeds due to slower maximum apertures. I had started carrying a tripod with the E5 outfit much of time too anyway. It's funny how spending what I spent on a carbon fiber tripod does that to you!

I'm not sure how much anyone needs to be holding their breathe for loads of new, fast lenses from Olympus. Holding your breathe waiting for ANYTHING from Olympus is a death sentence, and I'm fairly sure whatever the specs for this supposed "pro Pen" body winds up really being, it won't be what many are hoping it is.

 

[duckling]

Some of them sooner rather than later. Fast zooms, IMHO, will probably never make it to the market, except one or two "standard" zooms which would not be very fast anyway (perhaps f/2.8-3.5).

You see, small lenses are the raison d'être of m4/3. In my view all this system needs is a small array of fast, very good and reasonably small primes. 12, 17, 20, 25, 50 and 90mm should do. It is quite possible that by the end of this month most of them will be announced.
--
Gallery: http://weatherloony.fruitsens.com/snphoto.html

 

[Jorginho]

Although I am waiting for something like a 12-60 mm f2.8 etc I feel 2,5 years is a very short time to do this.

Things that might be influencing this, other than time:

• economical situation
• Complaints (m4/3 lenses are too expensive according to some anyway)
• Priorities: you only have so much money, what are you going to do with it?

Let's compare to the competition first:

• Sony has made 3 lenses in the last 1 year and 2 cam bodies.
• Samsung has made four bodies in the last 1,5 years with the very same sensor in it and I think 5 lenses.

Panasonic does better than any of those brands, I'd say much better. Panasonic and Olympus combined offer even more.

If we look at the next six months these are the lenses that are announced and rumoured combined:

• 12 mm f2.0 Oly
• 25 mm 1.4 Panaleica
• 50 mm f1.8/45m f1.7 (no macor, only portrait, Oly)

At the end of 2010, Panny had a bright zoom and a bright wide angle "under consideration". I have never seen a roadmap and that is kind of strange.

I think the word here is just some patience, although I will say it time and time again when it comes to lenses: a fast portrait with OIS please is the first thing we need and it is now way overdue if we look at fish eyes, 3D and other speciality and may I say nonsense lenses (3d)...

The 50mm 1.8 Oly is almost a godsend...

 

[discopolana]

My only concern is: how many units Olympus managed to produce?
I want my 12mm and 50mm from the very first batch.
I just hope Oly 12/2.0 will not be next 25/.95 when it comes to availability.

Best,
d

ps. They are, finally they are!

 

[BigBarney]

It seems the m4/3 finally is getting a decent foothold. I've been seeing more and more Pens and Panasonics out on the trail recently and just yesterday I saw somebody shooting at an event with a GH2.

Still, it's been 2 1/2 years since m4/3 came out and by my count there are only 2 native lenses faster than f/2.8 (Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5). The situation is even worse with the zooms - there's only one constant aperture zoom (the 7-14/4) and no native zoom faster than f/3.5. Obviously m4/3 isn't aimed at the high-end yet, but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C. Considering that the sensors are 1-1 1/3 stops worse, that would mean 1-stop faster zooms, that would mean something like a 14-42/2.5-4.0 to equal an 18-55/3.5-5.6.

I like my E-P2 and 20/1.7 a lot, but it's getting frustrating waiting for good native lenses, like a portrait prime or a high quality standard zoom. The prices have also remained quite high on the consumer lenses. I'm sure the Olympus 75-300 is a decent lens, but $800 for a lens that hits f/6.7 at the long end is a bit hard to swallow.

Most of us here are amateur photographers with varying degrees of experience and skill. In my working life I spent almost all of it in research, development, business development and marketing in a specialised branch of the pharmaceutical industry. When I was responsible for R&D for an international company for a period of 2 years I led a team that developed what was then (1988) and remains today the best drug of its kind on the market. As a development scientist you have to inure yourself to the constant howls from people who think they could do better, but who mysteriously have never done so.

I will try not to draw too many parallels between the pharmaceutical and the photographic industries, but suffice it to say that both require considerable expertise, commitment and skill to bring innovative new products to the market. When I look at what Panasonic has done in those 2.5 years they have launched 11 different lenses and more are promised for later in 2011. From where I sit that is a pretty considerable achievement.

So far I have found a reason to purchase 7 of those 11 lenses, the exceptions being the 8mm fisheye, the 12.5mm 3D lens, the 14mm f2.5 and the 14-42mm kit zoom. Personally I have no desire to enter the realms of 3D photography but I will not complain when Panasonic develops such a lens because I know that others see it as important. Similarly with extreme wide angle the 8mm fisheye is nice to have but not essential when you have the 7-14mm f4. The 14mm pancake is a useful addition to the range but my preference would be for a small 12mm prime, and hopefully Olympus will launch it soon. My G1 was bought with the 14-45mm kit zoom, so I do not need the 14-42mm.

I sometimes feel as if the constant howling for a portrait lens is more to do with the need for some posters (not necessarily you) to be seen in public rather than a photographic necessity. Personally I find that both the Panasonic Leica 45mm f2.8 and my older Canon FD 50mm f1.8 lenses make good enough (for me) portrait lenses. If neither of these floats anyone's boat there is always the Nokton 50mm f0.95 manual focus lens.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

The GH2 is pretty much on par with every single entry level DSLR. In jpg mode the G3 is very close as well. I used to never use the zoom lenses with my GF1 now the 14-140mm is pretty much the only lens I use with my GH2.

You are right that they haven't produced much in the way of really fast AF lenses in last few years. However, Panasonic has made huge jumps in sensor technology which does make up for it.

Maybe you should consider getting a Panasonic body or just waiting for Olympus's new line of cameras. The fast glass coming though. The 25mm F1.4 should be really nice and I think there will be a fast wide prime and fast 50mm by the end of the year.

It seems the m4/3 finally is getting a decent foothold. I've been seeing more and more Pens and Panasonics out on the trail recently and just yesterday I saw somebody shooting at an event with a GH2.

but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C. Considering that the sensors are 1-1 1/3 stops worse.

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums

 

[Kikl]

"Still, it's been 2 1/2 years since m4/3 came out and by my count there are only 2 native lenses faster than f/2.8 (Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5)."

Well, you may have missed these lenses:

panasonic 45mm f/2.8

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/macro.html#i_045mm_f028_panasonic

olympus 17mm f/2.8

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/single.html#i_017mm_f028_olympus

Voigtländer 25 mm f/0.95

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/manual.html#i_025mm_f095_cosina

What about these lenses:

Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 28mm/T2.1
Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 35mm/T2.1
Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 50mm/T2.1
Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 85mm/T2.1
Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 100mm/T2.1
Carl Zeiss : Compact Prime CP.2 50mm/T2.1 Makro

Schneider : Cine-Xenar 25mm/T2.2
Schneider : Cine-Xenar 35mm/T2.1
Schneider : Cine-Xenar 50mm/T2.0
Schneider : Cine-Xenar 75mm/T2.0
Schneider : Cine-Xenar 95mm/T2.0

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/cine-sys.html

Yup, these cine-lenses are very expensive. Nevertheless you get them with a native m43 mount and they are high quality lenses too.

I do agree that fast zooms are not available in the native mount. But, you can use the 43/m43 adapter which gives you the following fast lenses:

Olympus 14-35 mm f/2.0

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/standard.html#i_014-035mm_f020_olympus

Olympus 35-100mm f/2.0

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/telephoto.html#i_035-100mm_f020_olympus

Olympus 90-250mm f/2.8

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/telephoto.html#i_090-250mm_f028_olympus

I think that's quite a good selection of lenses. Sure, more and cheaper would be better, but I don't think the situation is as bleak as you make it. If you are willing to carry around a few lenses then I don't think the use of the adapter should be a show stopper. Additional 43 lenses can be had here:

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/lense.html

 

[Aleo Veuliah]

It seems the m4/3 finally is getting a decent foothold. I've been seeing more and more Pens and Panasonics out on the trail recently and just yesterday I saw somebody shooting at an event with a GH2.

Still, it's been 2 1/2 years since m4/3 came out and by my count there are only 2 native lenses faster than f/2.8 (Panasonic 20/1.7 and 14/2.5). The situation is even worse with the zooms - there's only one constant aperture zoom (the 7-14/4) and no native zoom faster than f/3.5. Obviously m4/3 isn't aimed at the high-end yet, but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C. Considering that the sensors are 1-1 1/3 stops worse, that would mean 1-stop faster zooms, that would mean something like a 14-42/2.5-4.0 to equal an 18-55/3.5-5.6.

I like my E-P2 and 20/1.7 a lot, but it's getting frustrating waiting for good native lenses, like a portrait prime or a high quality standard zoom. The prices have also remained quite high on the consumer lenses. I'm sure the Olympus 75-300 is a decent lens, but $800 for a lens that hits f/6.7 at the long end is a bit hard to swallow.

Most of us here are amateur photographers with varying degrees of experience and skill. In my working life I spent almost all of it in research, development, business development and marketing in a specialised branch of the pharmaceutical industry. When I was responsible for R&D for an international company for a period of 2 years I led a team that developed what was then (1988) and remains today the best drug of its kind on the market. As a development scientist you have to inure yourself to the constant howls from people who think they could do better, but who mysteriously have never done so.

I will try not to draw too many parallels between the pharmaceutical and the photographic industries, but suffice it to say that both require considerable expertise, commitment and skill to bring innovative new products to the market. When I look at what Panasonic has done in those 2.5 years they have launched 11 different lenses and more are promised for later in 2011. From where I sit that is a pretty considerable achievement.

So far I have found a reason to purchase 7 of those 11 lenses, the exceptions being the 8mm fisheye, the 12.5mm 3D lens, the 14mm f2.5 and the 14-42mm kit zoom. Personally I have no desire to enter the realms of 3D photography but I will not complain when Panasonic develops such a lens because I know that others see it as important. Similarly with extreme wide angle the 8mm fisheye is nice to have but not essential when you have the 7-14mm f4. The 14mm pancake is a useful addition to the range but my preference would be for a small 12mm prime, and hopefully Olympus will launch it soon. My G1 was bought with the 14-45mm kit zoom, so I do not need the 14-42mm.

I sometimes feel as if the constant howling for a portrait lens is more to do with the need for some posters (not necessarily you) to be seen in public rather than a photographic necessity. Personally I find that both the Panasonic Leica 45mm f2.8 and my older Canon FD 50mm f1.8 lenses make good enough (for me) portrait lenses. If neither of these floats anyone's boat there is always the Nokton 50mm f0.95 manual focus lens.

--
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

God is the tangential point between zero and infinity.

Imagination is more important than knowledge.

God always take the simplest way.

• http://aleo-photo.org

• http://blog.aleo-photo.org

• http://zen.aleo-photo.org

 

[mfbernstein]

I think as far as Olympus is concerned, they've gone just the opposite direction of 4/3rd's, where there was such a noise in part about how the better lenses and bodies were not that much smaller/if at all than the larger format systems, and smaller size was part of their stated reasoning in going with the smaller sensor. In the case of micro 4/3rd's, "micro" seems to be the key word, with smallest possible the primary specification for everything, at the cost of anything fast.

Right! But the thing is that primes are smaller than zooms, yet the system is mostly zooms still. Personally, I think primes make much more sense with the smaller bodies (Pen, GF series), but there are 4 native primes vs. at least a dozen zooms.

With an outfit this small and light (in my case, the E-PL1, 20/1.7 Panny, 14-42II and 40-150 for now), carrying something like a monopod or my new Manfrotto carbon fiber tripod that weighs about what my Olympus 50-200 SWD alone weighs, is nothing compared to the backpack filled with the E5 outfit I've been carrying, and the quality can be as good if you just use the extra bit of care in stabilizing the outfit when you shoot at the necessary lower shutter speeds due to slower maximum apertures. I had started carrying a tripod with the E5 outfit much of time too anyway. It's funny how spending what I spent on a carbon fiber tripod does that to you!

Interesting. I shoot handheld only so a tripod would more or less negate any weight savings over my normal kit!

It sounds like you find the 40-150 as sharp as the 50-200 though? That's quite encouraging.

I'm not sure how much anyone needs to be holding their breathe for loads of new, fast lenses from Olympus. Holding your breathe waiting for ANYTHING from Olympus is a death sentence, and I'm fairly sure whatever the specs for this supposed "pro Pen" body winds up really being, it won't be what many are hoping it is.

You're probably right about waiting in vain. What puzzles me is that they have all the pieces but they don't put them together.

Thanks for your thought!

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[mfbernstein]

Some of them sooner rather than later. Fast zooms, IMHO, will probably never make it to the market, except one or two "standard" zooms which would not be very fast anyway (perhaps f/2.8-3.5).

You see, small lenses are the raison d'être of m4/3. In my view all this system needs is a small array of fast, very good and reasonably small primes. 12, 17, 20, 25, 50 and 90mm should do. It is quite possible that by the end of this month most of them will be announced.

That would be excellent. The 20/1.7 is good optically (better AF would be nice). But the 14/2.5 is not as sharp as the kit 14-45 and the 17/2.8 is even less sharp. I tried the 45/2.8 too - decent IQ but the price is quite steep for a lens that is 1 stop slower than 4/3 50/2. And that's it for primes so far...

I definitely agree about small lenses being the point. That's why I'm surprised they haven't made better use of primes. A 12mm, 50mm and 90mm would be great news, but it's been 30+ months so far...

f/2.8-3.5 may not sound like much, but that's what is needed to have comparable flexibility to kit APS-C zooms.

Thanks,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[mfbernstein]

Although I am waiting for something like a 12-60 mm f2.8 etc I feel 2,5 years is a very short time to do this.

Really? Over the first 2.5 years of 4/3, Olympus alone released a dozen lenses by my count:

7-14, 11-22, 14-45, 14-54/2.8-3.5, 35-100, 40-150, 50-200, 90-250, 35, 50, 150, 300.

Contrast that with their micro offerings:
9-18, 14-42, 14-150, 40-150, 75-300 and 17.

Panasonic has done better, but if you eliminate the overlaps, the two combined cover less possibilities than Olympus alone did by late 2005.

Things that might be influencing this, other than time:

• economical situation
• Complaints (m4/3 lenses are too expensive according to some anyway)

Well, I find that hard to disagree with. Compare the 14-42 to an 18-55, the 20/1.7 to a 35/1.8 or a 40-150 to a 55-200. You're paying significantly more for the micro variants - a 50-100% premium.

• Priorities: you only have so much money, what are you going to do with it?

Let's compare to the competition first:

• Sony has made 3 lenses in the last 1 year and 2 cam bodies.
• Samsung has made four bodies in the last 1,5 years with the very same sensor in it and I think 5 lenses.

Panasonic does better than any of those brands, I'd say much better. Panasonic and Olympus combined offer even more.

That's true, although I think that says a lot more about Samsung's lack of experience and Sony's lack of focus than anything else.

If we look at the next six months these are the lenses that are announced and rumoured combined:

• 12 mm f2.0 Oly
• 25 mm 1.4 Panaleica
• 50 mm f1.8/45m f1.7 (no macor, only portrait, Oly)

Those sounds quite good. If they are in fact good lenses (sharp at wider apertures as well as stopped down, good AF performance), they would go a long way to plugging the holes in the m4/3 lineup.

At the end of 2010, Panny had a bright zoom and a bright wide angle "under consideration". I have never seen a roadmap and that is kind of strange.

I think the word here is just some patience, although I will say it time and time again when it comes to lenses: a fast portrait with OIS please is the first thing we need and it is now way overdue if we look at fish eyes, 3D and other speciality and may I say nonsense lenses (3d)...

Agreed. Even worse is that Oly seems to have plans to duplicate the fisheye. Specialty lenses are fine, but only after the core system has already been built up.

The 50mm 1.8 Oly is almost a godsend...

I really hope they manage to incorporate macro ability too. The ZD 50/2 with an updated focusing mechanism would be an incredible lens for micro.

Thanks,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[LincolnB]

What's interesting is that the Nokton ultra-fast prime is selling faster than they can make 'em.

I suspect that a fully implemented 35mm or 50mm f/2 faster would sell like hotcakes. I think a reasonably priced third-party manual focus 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 would sell quite well also. I don't think Olympus or Panasonic will ever do a MF lens for micro four thirds; it's just not their marketing style.

I wonder how much electronics it would take for a manual focus lens to register its settings to EXIF? i.e. a fully implemented M4/3 lens minus the focusing/aperture motors. What would be the cost savings over a fully AF lens? Probably not that much compared to deleting the electronics altogether, as in the Nokton, Zeiss, SLR Magic, Holga lenses, etc.

The "Point & Shoot Upgrade" market loves autofocus and zoom lenses. I don't think we'll be seeing too many fast AF zoom lenses, too pricey for that crowd.

 

[Dwip]

The situation is even worse with the zooms - there's only one constant aperture zoom (the 7-14/4) and no native zoom faster than f/3.5. Obviously m4/3 isn't aimed at the high-end yet, but it would be nice if the system were at least competitive with low end APS-C.

I totally agree with you. I'd buy a micro 4/3rds rig in a heartbeat if there were a decently bright zoom available. As far as I'm concerned, the defining characteristic of micro four thirds is the reduced size. I don't see how that's compatible with carrying a bag with prime lenses. Heck, I have a drawer full of Canon primes that I don't bother to lug around because it's a PITA.

Here's hoping that Oly gives us something like the 12-60 mm f 2.8-4.0 in a native m43 mount so that it focuses quickly and accurately on the m43 bodies.

My WAG (wild-ass guess): One of the third-party lens vendors (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) will come out with a f/2.8-4'ish standard zoom for m43, it will sell like hotcakes, and Oly will be giving themselves dope slaps because they had the technology to do it first if they want to.

 

[mfbernstein]

My only concern is: how many units Olympus managed to produce?
I want my 12mm and 50mm from the very first batch.
I just hope Oly 12/2.0 will not be next 25/.95 when it comes to availability.

Olympus has generally been okay in terms of production, unlike Panasonic. If anything, they often overestimate demand (see all the 14-42 mkI lenses that are still available in stores).

Voigtlander is a different kettle of fish entirely

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[mfbernstein]

I will try not to draw too many parallels between the pharmaceutical and the photographic industries, but suffice it to say that both require considerable expertise, commitment and skill to bring innovative new products to the market. When I look at what Panasonic has done in those 2.5 years they have launched 11 different lenses and more are promised for later in 2011. From where I sit that is a pretty considerable achievement.

I certainly don't want to minimize what they've done. They've released several excellent products like the 20/1.7 and the 7-14/4.

At the same time, it's hard not to compare m4/3 and regular 4/3 at the same point in their development. What's striking to me is that in the first 30 months, Olympus put out a fairly comprehensive lineup of lenses comprising 3 tiers, and with 1 exception all were excellent performers. With m4/3 by contrast, basically all the lenses save 2 are consumer-grade, and the vast majority of those suffer from relatively slow apertures.

I sometimes feel as if the constant howling for a portrait lens is more to do with the need for some posters (not necessarily you) to be seen in public rather than a photographic necessity. Personally I find that both the Panasonic Leica 45mm f2.8 and my older Canon FD 50mm f1.8 lenses make good enough (for me) portrait lenses. If neither of these floats anyone's boat there is always the Nokton 50mm f0.95 manual focus lens.

I somewhat disagree. $800 for a portrait lens is quite a lot, and manual focus is far from ideal in many cases. When a $200 50/1.8 can offer AF, good bokeh and shallow DoF and a good AoV for portraits on APS-C, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a 40/1.8 could be made for similar uses and cost for m4/3.

Cheers,

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey

 

[mausta]

What I would like to see:

Panasonic 50mm f1.4 with IS priced near the 20mm f1.7 (under $400), that is optimized for video (fast quiet AF motor). Even f1.7 or f2 would do...
This would be a great portrait lens and an awesome indoor video lens.

I use my Canon FD 50mm f1.8, Minolta Rokkor 58mm f1.4, and Nikon 55mm f2.8 Micro (one of the sharpest lens Nikon has ever produced, sharp from f2.8 through entire aperture range), for portrait work, though it would be nice to have autofocus in order to snap more keepers.

A 7mm prime lens for landscapes. Something simple to keep the price down.

 

[mh2000]

amazing how well it works and how much better all these lenses look at f5.6!