Laowa 6mm F/2.1 - the widest liniar lens for m4/3

[Toni Genes]

Laowa just announced a few new lenses with m4/3 mount.

There is a 6mm F/2.1 new lens, with zero distorsion.

It supports 58mm standard filters.

It weights 180 grams and costs 700$.

Here is the place where I found this news :

Loading…

www.43rumors.com

And here is the link from the manufacturer, with specifications and video presentations:

Loading…

www.venuslens.net

 

[FrankieB42]

Really strange to see it released firstly as Cineline model, normally it's opposite for them.

I haven't been to local Laowa shop in long time, I think should stop by to take a look.

 

[dbledsoe]

Well that venuslens.net link didn't last long. I got the 404 page error?

 

[Tom Caldwell]

For some time the Sigma DC 8-0-16/4.5-5.6 zoom in EF mount has been capable of being focal reduced on the M4/3 mount.

This is a native aps-c image circle lens and will put its full image circle on to the 4/3 sensor (slightly more) and you get quite acceptable AF as well.

Once focal reduced the effective fov is approx 5.6-11.2 and an extra stops worth of light is gained.

The lens has fixed hood petals which will vignette in 4:3 capture format - but switch to its designed 3:2 format and the vignette goes away.

Fairly well corrected and it is a zoom as well.

Not for everyone but it just pips the Laowa, is AF, and has been around for some time.

 

[Richard_Wong]

Well that venuslens.net link didn't last long. I got the 404 page error?

The lens is not released yet. But just wait a little bit!

 

[Brandon birder]

Well that venuslens.net link didn't last long. I got the 404 page error?

The lens is not released yet. But just wait a little bit!

Link is working again. Here in the UK.

 

[northlondon43]

A review of the only pre production model by Red35

 

[kenlee]

Richard Wong's excellent in-depth review as usual, he tested it on the GH6

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

 

[Toni Genes]

there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

You can go even wider with Olympus 8mm F/1.8 defished in the camera.

Laowa 6mm is a T/2.1 lens, This means it is good in low-light, astro photography.

The Sigma zoom gives you versatility, but the aperture is slow and probably the sharpness is not that good as a fix lens. The distorsion will also not match the nearly zero distorsion provided by Laowa.

And finnally that Sigma lens weights 555 grams. Add the adaptor and you have a huge lens : very heavy and long.

I saw people are complaining for Sigma 8-18mm because of chromatic aberations, flare and because is not possible to mount filters.

 

[tammons]

Laowa just announced a few new lenses with m4/3 mount.

There is a 6mm F/2.1 new lens, with zero distorsion.

It supports 58mm standard filters.

It weights 180 grams and costs 700$.

Here is the place where I found this news :

https://www.43rumors.com/laowa-has-announced-four-new-mft-lenses/

And here is the link from the manufacturer, with specifications and video presentations:

https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-6mm-t2-1-zero-d-mft-cine/

Finally someone makes a 6mm rectilinear lens. It's about time.

 

[Impulses]

Based on the pricing of the other cine versions I imagine they'll eventually sell a non-cine version of the 6/2 for like $550-600, if so I think that'll make it the cheapest rectilinear prime <14mm on any format (their FF 11/4.5 is $700 FWIW). It looks very interesting IMO, if I was still shooting wide very often with my M4/3 gear I'd probably be thinking about it; maybe along with the 10/2, possibly replacing my 7.5/2 & Oly 12/2 (tho I got the latter as refurb for a song and would miss it's AF).

 

[Skeeterbytes]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

Guessing (only just that) folks shooting on the move using handheld gimbal rigs, and m4/3 drones will find plenty of uses. Perhaps ECU shooting from a slider, as well.

I'm happy with their clever 7.5/2.0 but that lacks gearing for focus and aperture control, for folks so-inclined.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[Impulses]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

You can go even wider with Olympus 8mm F/1.8 defished in the camera.

Laowa 6mm is a T/2.1 lens, This means it is good in low-light, astro photography.

The Sigma zoom gives you versatility, but the aperture is slow and probably the sharpness is not that good as a fix lens. The distorsion will also not match the nearly zero distorsion provided by Laowa.

And finnally that Sigma lens weights 555 grams. Add the adaptor and you have a huge lens : very heavy and long.

I saw people are complaining for Sigma 8-18mm because of chromatic aberations, flare and because is not possible to mount filters.

Thanks, I basically agree with what you say but something needed to be said in response to the basic OP statement as a query “widest linear lens for M4/3.

I can add another negative in that the Sima lens is in EF mount and need to be focal reduced by an expensive electronic adapter to just match the FL fov of the Laowa. But some will appreciate the ability to zoom and the quite usable AF and the FR adds a stop worth of light but oboviously does not match the Laowa.

I obviously missed the genre of astro - sorry.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

Guessing (only just that) folks shooting on the move using handheld gimbal rigs, and m4/3 drones will find plenty of uses. Perhaps ECU shooting from a slider, as well.

I'm happy with their clever 7.5/2.0 but that lacks gearing for focus and aperture control, for folks so-inclined.

Cheers,

Rick

Thanks - I just made a statement but perhaps with not enough perspective - I will not need sackcloth and ashes just yet

Thanks for putting forward some extended purposes of use. The Sigma is a reasonably large lens that would not bother some and does have the advantage of a wider range of potential uses - it can be used cropped on standard electronic adapters as focal reduction ones. Also it can be used on any aps-c camera body with a suitable adapter and even on L-Mount where it works auto crop-sensor.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

It's definitely way more niche than 8mm or even 7mm, the difference may not sound like much but it's drastic in practice... You can always crop in a little tho, avoiding it's worst flaw (vignetting), it would still yield like ~13MP cropped to 7.5mm. I think I'd rather have a very very wide prime like this as a complement to one of the native UWA zooms than lug a relatively larger & beefier DSLR zoom on an adapter, but that's very subjective.

I'd use this like I use my fisheye, throw it in the bag for when I think I've found one of those unique shots it'll really shine with, they're small enough to not be a bother otherwise or make me second guess bringing it if I'm using a larger bag.

I do have the compact Laowa 7.5/2.0 which is wide enough, tiny and compact for my prime shooting needs.

All I can get around here is headland and beach and more headlands and beach for hundreds of kms and they tend to look much the same after a very short while. Australian bush itself has a certain sameness also and representative images whilst can be excellent in their own right can also develop a sameness after a short while.

Quite a different genre and maybe not as arresting as the rocky outstanding scenery that can occur in many other parts of the world. This can provide impressive views with a very wide lens. But the rule requiring a subject in ones images is quite hard to find in wide angle shots of something that is just a sameness from wide corner to wide corner.

We can usually find something in an image that stands out as worth capturing but I have found out that many rural scenes in Australia work better with some telephoto to centre on and interesting subject somewhere in that bland nothingness that a wide angle could not distinguish enough to be seen as subject matter.

When the scene has a subject that is too small to be noticed it is hardly enough to exhibit your image simply noting that there is an interesting kangaroo in there doing handstands if you look close enough.

 

[Impulses]

I can advise the 6mm is seriously wide even on M4/3 Some might have a use for it but I am not quite sure what it is. I have used the Sigma DC 8-16 zoom focal reduced and there are times when fly specks in majestic scenery at 5.6mm can be interesting but at least the Sigma can be used all the way out to 16mm as well.

It's definitely way more niche than 8mm or even 7mm, the difference may not sound like much but it's drastic in practice... You can always crop in a little tho, avoiding it's worst flaw (vignetting), it would still yield like ~13MP cropped to 7.5mm. I think I'd rather have a very very wide prime like this as a complement to one of the native UWA zooms than lug a relatively larger & beefier DSLR zoom on an adapter, but that's very subjective.

I'd use this like I use my fisheye, throw it in the bag for when I think I've found one of those unique shots it'll really shine with, they're small enough to not be a bother otherwise or make me second guess bringing it if I'm using a larger bag.

I do have the compact Laowa 7.5/2.0 which is wide enough, tiny and compact for my prime shooting needs.

All I can get around here is headland and beach and more headlands and beach for hundreds of kms and they tend to look much the same after a very short while. Australian bush itself has a certain sameness also and representative images whilst can be excellent in their own right can also develop a sameness after a short while.

Quite a different genre and maybe not as arresting as the rocky outstanding scenery that can occur in many other parts of the world. This can provide impressive views with a very wide lens. But the rule requiring a subject in ones images is quite hard to find in wide angle shots of something that is just a sameness from wide corner to wide corner.

We can usually find something in an image that stands out as worth capturing but I have found out that many rural scenes in Australia work better with some telephoto to centre on and interesting subject somewhere in that bland nothingness that a wide angle could not distinguish enough to be seen as subject matter.

When the scene has a subject that is too small to be noticed it is hardly enough to exhibit your image simply noting that there is an interesting kangaroo in there doing handstands if you look close enough.

 

[FrankieB42]

at the same time I don't really understand why UWAs are considered a de facto landscape lens by some. I think it's somewhat of a misconception tbh, I actually get a lot more usable shots with an UWA in the middle of a city or even indoors than out in nature (let alone when faced with vast but far away vistas).

Because everybody follows that trend with pile of rock / flower just 1 m in front of your camera and some hills in the back

 

[Impulses]

at the same time I don't really understand why UWAs are considered a de facto landscape lens by some. I think it's somewhat of a misconception tbh, I actually get a lot more usable shots with an UWA in the middle of a city or even indoors than out in nature (let alone when faced with vast but far away vistas).

Because everybody follows that trend with pile of rock / flower just 1 m in front of your camera and some hills in the back