OM Digital Solutions announces development of 20mm F1.4 and 40-150mm F4.0 PRO lenses, updates lens roadmap

Both the kit lens 40-150mm and the pro 2.8/f are pretty good. Both are plenty sharp. the former is very light and inexpensive and the latter is a workhorse and can be used with teleconverters. Don't know who would buy this intermediate model.

Sep 25, 2021permalink

peter in seattle

One reader asks: who would buy the 40-150 f4 pro .... I would! For travel and hiking, light weight is important, and I want the PRO level optics.

Oct 2, 2021permalink

doraemonium

I would, too.
40-150 f4-5.6 is light and cheap, but it is not weather-sealed. f2.8 Pro is fast and weather-sealed, but very heavy and relatively expensive.
So 40-150 f4 Pro provides a very good solution for users who want a light and weather-sealed lens. Not to say the optical difference between an entry level lens and a pro one.
The advantage of m43 system is its weight and size, but most Pro lenses are too large and heavy although they do have very good optics. I think Olympus, and now OM Digital, found a correct direction since debut of 12-45 f4 Pro.

Oct 19, 2021permalink

gary0319

I have both the 12-45 f/4 Pro and the 12-100 f/4 Pro. Of the two I use the 12-45 way more often. The 12-100 f/4 at 100mm is too short to be long and the size/weight is too heavy to be light on my E-M5 III. This 40-150 f/4 Pro looks to be a great complement to the 12-45 and will most likely replace my 12-100.

As an aside, all of the current f/4 Pro lenses seem to be exceptionally sharp, and I expect this new one to continue the same.

Oct 20, 2021*permalink

EZGritz

I don't need anything faster than f/4 most of the time. I'll take the 40-150 f/2.8 If I think I'll need but when I don't I'll use the f/4 if the optics are good. The 40-150 f/2.8 tired me out if I shoot it all day. The f/4 looks to be much lighter.

I love the 75 f/1.8 and would appreciate a 150mm version. Don't think I would buy a 100 prime.

Oct 27, 2021permalink

dahod

Regardless of the pros and cons, I'm just happy that OM Digital Solutions have apparently decided to stay in the game for now. Hopefully they continue to think that way. Two thumbs up.

Sep 14, 2021permalink

dpfan32

I'm waiting to see the 20mm f1.4 in real life and place it next to a Canon 40mm f2.8 STM which is the exact equivalent.

The 40mm 2.8 STM is super small, tack sharp (even on high megapixel density crop bodies) and feels like a lens cap.

For the 20mm f1.4 I have the strange feeling that it will be huge in comparison.

It would turn the camera concepts upside down...

I know the camera body of a M1 Mark III is smaller than a Canon 6D Mark II (the smallest full frame DSLR from Canon) but the body/lens combination would turn for the Canon to an advantage I think.

Sep 14, 2021*permalink

NowHearThis

You realize that those aren't the only lenses each manufacturer makes. The problem with the FF Canon DSLRs is while you can get a small lens here and there, you can't on the vast majority of their lenses.

An Olympus body (like my EM1.2) with the O12-100/4 vs a 6D II + EF24-105/4L II is smaller and lighter, has nearly 2x the range, along with dozens of advantages over the 6D not to mention that it's $150 cheaper ($300 less if you compare equal quality used gear) and 425g lighter. And this using the biggest and heaviest wide zoom in the M43 lineup. Heck, even if the 20/1.4 is 2x the weight of the Oly 25/1.8, the Oly Body and 2 lenses will still weigh a couple hundred grams less than that 6D brick.

But I get that some people are into HD only video, a 1/4000 sec shutter, 1 card slot, 6.5fps continuous shooting, and no IBIS. I'm not, but YMMV.

Sep 18, 2021*permalink

Well said, i don’t understand why people comment on system they have not used, and simply make a fool of themselves with silly comparisons.

Sep 24, 2021permalink

Richard2Go

It seems strange to me that OM would release a 20mm f1.4, when the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 has been such a stalwart of the system for so many years. I’m sure this new lens will be quite capable, but the Panny is tack sharp, relatively inexpensive and super-compact, and I’m guessing that you’d have to massively pixel peep to see any real differences between the two. I hope for OM’s sake that this lens is a success, but it’s not like there are large numbers of M/43 users out there craving a quality lens in this focal length.

Sep 13, 2021*permalink

George1958

I imagine the Olympus version , albeit slightly faster, will have a much more snappy AF than the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 and likely weather sealing too. In short it’s a different offering

Sep 13, 2021permalink

Alexis D

It would make much more sense to me, if Olympus release a new 17mm f/1.8 II WR instead, as it would be smaller, lighter, more reasonably priced and easier to recover costs than this. The general unexciting performance/features of small primes in MFT is another reason. The existing 17mm f/1.8 is well known for mediocre performnce, it's not WR and not exactly good value either (e.g. compared to Olympus 25mm f/1.8). The Pansonic 20mm is great but has significant AF issues. The Panasonic 15mm is fine in performance, a bit odd in its FL, not WR, and as such quite expensive, and, being a Panasonic lens, does not work perfectly with Olympus bodies.

This new Olympus 20mm f/1.4 PRO is clearly one of those already in train, and like all the other PRO lenses the Olympus started, a bit too much for most MFT users. OMDS should think about why Olympus, with all its history and support from loyal fans, failed to survive, and try to do something different, than following the same path.

Sep 14, 2021*permalink

George1958

for me the jury is out until the new 20mm has been tested. I have owned the Panasonic 20mm F1.7 and still own the Olympus 17mm F1.8. The former was very sharp but quite noisy and slow to focus, the latter is sharp in the middle and (my copy at least) acceptably sharp toward the edge of the frame.
I am anticipating the new 20mm to be sharper, faster focussing and of course it will be WR. I hope that the asking price is well below the price of the stellar 17mm f1.2.
In the event I will be trading my Olympus 17mm F1.8 for the 20mm.

Sep 14, 2021permalink

Matthias R

The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 is small, and image quality is pretty good on Panasonic bodies. But due to weird choices of coating it produces a lot of purple fringing on Olympus bodies, focusing is subpar, and manual focussing is very difficult. When I bought one I really thought I had the one everyday prime lens I wanted, I ended up selling it after a year and getting Olympus' 25mm and 17mm instead. The 25mm is very nice, the 17mm is fabulous - size, build quality, that clutched manual focus ring...). A 20mm with similar characteristics would be a very attractive lens.

Sep 16, 2021permalink

cosinaphile

can you at least call te lenses zukio?..... there is value in tradition and in names that belong to history ... and unite you to history ... jus sayin .....

Sep 13, 2021permalink

JonBowen

I think all Oly fans would prefer Zuiko ( 瑞光 ), it's Japanese, not Italian 😁

Sep 13, 2021permalink

FrancoD

not sure what you are talking about... Zukio ????

Sep 15, 2021permalink

cosinaphile

minolta lenses used to have a designation sometimes as ROKKOR
nikon has nikkor.. pentax ued takumar ... leica used summilux or elmar and others

olympus uses "zuiko" if you ever develop a craving for vintage lenses
these names and many others will be seen frequently

Sep 15, 2021permalink

? What are you talking about ? These lenses carry the M.Zuiko monicker.

Sep 24, 2021permalink

Oreoloveboss

Uhh these lenses are also branded M.Zuiko, the M is just for micro 4/3

Nov 4, 2021permalink

There have been some interesting debates on where Sensor Tech has gotten over the last few years. DPR has posted articles such as, "DPReview TV: Why lower resolution sensors are not better in low light" Published Aug 14, 2021

We also have seen some talk about "ISO invariant" due to the latest advancements in Sensors. All that being stated, I don't get why some don't believe that more MP wouldn't be an good thing for MFT top end bodies. I also believe both Panasonic and OM Digital Solutions need to update potential buyers into MFT on that front.

Sep 12, 2021*permalink

24 MP or 20MP makes hardly any difference and when you go to 30 or 40MP you can only use those heavy expensive lenses. They have no benefit for the smaller sensor. Small, lightweight and wheather-resistent are the most important aspects of MFT, there are the chances. I would rather take an extra body with a lightweight lens, instead of an extra heavy lens. Autofocus is the bottleneck at the moment.

Sep 12, 2021*permalink

Yxa

A 10 mm F1.4 or wider would be great.
20mm is already a crowded place

Sep 11, 2021permalink

f1.8 or f2.0 would also be great, but most importantly: it must be small!

Sep 12, 2021permalink

Lenses sound good but I think the turning point will be new high-end body. If they manage to come up with a replacement for the OMD mk III, we can conclude the new owners are still committed to spending on R&D. A double miracle would be a new body and a higher res sensor. On the other hand, releasing an existing body minus the viewfinder is not all that encouraging.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Reactive

Exactly. Who's interested in a "lens roadmap" if there will be no further OM bodies?

Sep 11, 2021permalink

There will be future body's. They've already released the E-P7 and will come with a new high end body this year it seems. 20mp sensor is more than enough. A stacked sensor would be most welcome.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

mount evans

Chasing more megapickles in not the answer. A new sensor with new technology--say, a Back Illuminated Sensor--would be nice, but cramming more pixels into the same space when you are already pushing the limits of optical interference just increases the noise per pixel with no benefit.

Stacked sensors sound nice, but there must be a reason that they don't seem to be going anywhere.

Will any future lenses offer synchronized IBIS and OIS? Or are they just re-branding Sigma lenses?

Sep 11, 2021permalink

3Percent

To OM Digital Solutions: If you want to make a grabbing headliner press release, you're going to need to get really creative in this current market climate. It will require you having truly listened closely to customer needs beforehand. There are holes in the current market that could be filled, but I don't see your current lineup or future lineup filling them so far.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Anastigmat

I wonder how many professional photographers use Olympus cameras and the "Pro" lenses on their assignments.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Especially since so many PROs claim, Gear doesn't matter.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Hear many PROs claim : "Gear doesn't matter".
But, Canon EOS R5 and Sony A1 sold to PROs or enthusiast or beginners？

Sep 11, 2021*permalink

As a hobby photographer I own 3 of these Pro lenses. What it tells to me that the image quality is very good, and the construction of the lenses is build to last for all kinds of weather conditions. A M.Zuiko Pro lens is a joy to use.
And not that it matters, but there are plenty professional photographers that use Olympus MFT. At the end only the results the photographer matters, not the gear he/she used.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

"At the end only the results the photographer matters, not the gear he/she used."

Well I would certainly say one has to use the Right gear for the expected results. So just the photographer alone is just another myth. IMO. That's not stating it has to be MFT, MF, FF or whatever. But to use the right combination of Tools regardless of Sensor size if one wants the expected results for each case usage.

For example, you ain't going use an 50mm to fill the frame with an Bird when it requires an 400mm. So the photographer needs to understand their tools an how to use them in each case. So again, one can't just grab anything an get expected results regardless of skill level. Right tools per case usage. All the different sensor sizes bring different pluses and minuses to the game. Each person just has to learn how to best exploit them.

Sep 11, 2021*permalink

I do. More so than my Sony FF these days.

Sep 12, 2021permalink

Reactive

On TV sport coverage, I'm always interested when they turn the TV camera on the lines of press photographers during an interval. I have never seen a single Olympus body being held at any event, even though an OM is supposed to be ideally suited to fast action. On the US open final coverage, I spotted mostly Canon, a couple of Sony, and one Nikon. I would be very suprised to see any new body that isn't just a reworking of their current components (until stocks are run down).

Sep 12, 2021permalink

There is a lot more to professional photography that’s sports coverage.

Sep 12, 2021permalink

George1958

You could always research the question, no need to wonder

Sep 13, 2021permalink

User1666997680

Any macro above 100 or 120 would be fantastic.
A 150 f/4 macro optically stabilized compatible with a doubler would be a dream to serve both as a macro and as a tele. Instant buy.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

JonBowen

Another disappointment! When will there be an update of what is said to be the most popular of the Zuiko 4:3 standard zoom lenses, the Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5, a truly useful standard zoom range? The µ4:3, 12-40mm f/2.8 is unnecessarily short at the short end (how many owned a 24mm lens in the days of film?) and barely long enough at the long end for a portrait; while 12–45mm is better, to say f/4.0 is a bit limiting is more than a bit of an understatement. Surely a major advantage of µ4:3 is being able to shoot wide open in low light and not loose DoF, so why is that advantage not being exploited?
It really is time to fill the gap in the PRO range with an update of the Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 to an M.Zuiko 14-54mm f/2.8–#.#

Sep 10, 2021permalink

User1666997680

When you need wider, you can’t get a 12eq.24 mm framing using a 14eq.28 mm ; on the other hand, when you need longer, you can slightly crop a 40eq.80 mm to get the framing of a 54eq.108 mm.

Plus the difference is larger between 14eq.28 and 12eq.24 (difference of 9°) than between 40eq.80 and 54eq.108 (difference of 6°).

For these two reasons I’m convinced that having a 24 mm instead of 28 opens up more possibilities than having a 108 mm instead of 80 mm.

Moreover focal lengths around 90–100 mm tend to be used for portrait, which is better served anyway by a wide-aperture dedicated lens (any 42.5) than by the smaller opening of the tele side of a zoom. That’s why I’m super happy with the Pana combination 12–32 + 42.5.

For all these reasons I think an eq. 24–80 is more versatile than a eq. 28–108. Of course your mileage may vary ;)

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Albert Valentino

I would say that the PL 12-60mm f/2.8 - f/4 would cover your needs nicely

Sep 10, 2021permalink

The only people who didn't own a 24mm in the film era were those who started so early that 28mm was as wide as you could get without going "super wide" which meant 20mm. 24mm lenses were extremely popular, eventually replacing 28mm. The only reason I can see for not having a zoom lens that starts wide is that these lenses tend to be soft in the corners. This gets buried in the reviews with "only in the extreme corners" or "sharpens up nicely by f/8".

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Strangefinder

Clearly 12mm is a popular zoom range, and there is a hunger for wides due to the crop factor, however, I agree that there’s great value in a high quality standard zoom starting at traditional 28mm or even 35-40mm FOV to either be truly compact, or attain the next height of performance.

Sigma released two f/2.8 standard zooms fairly recently for L-mount, 24-70 and 28-70. The weight and size reduction for the 28-70 is extraordinary.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

barny101

A new 12-60 would be nice.

Sep 16, 2021permalink

Polytropia

If sensor size was all that mattered then everyone would be shooting medium format. I've had great results from my Olympus gear. if you go Olympus but it takes bad pictures you would just sell it on eBay. But clearly a lot of people keep their Olympus gear and use it frequently to take professional quality images.

That being said, I'd love to also see a 135-format sensor camera from OM. I think previous deals between Oly and Sony restricted them from entering that segment—it was prolly a term of the bailout when Sony gave them half a billion in exchange for their sensor stabilization tech and a non-competition agreement.

But now that JIP makes OM, they would not be governed by Sony's restrictions (since that only restricted Olympus from entering the 135 market but not JIP!)

We'll see!

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

I would think the restrictions would still apply.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Anastigmat

OM Digital Solutions is a funny name, because it is a solution looking for a problem. New 4/3 lenses solve no problem.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Almost all new camera technology solves no problem. 60, 80, 100 megapixels solves what problem?

Sep 10, 2021permalink

60, 80, 100 megapixels solved :
1. no need "high res mode with tripod" issues.
2. low res when digital crop.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

highly selective. the software and optical engineers have to face many problems, when dealing with such an increase in pixel depth.
but for the customer is is just a number... the more the better?

Sep 13, 2021permalink

@kreislauf
If OM Digital sell camera body at $500 as old model, low resolution never mind (similar to extremely cheap Fujifilm XF10).

If OM Digital sell camera as $1700, sure need higher resolution than Fujifilm X-T4 26MP.

Sep 13, 2021permalink

Divisive topic. Not in my book. Resolution as a number is irrelevant for most of us.

More important is ergonomics and lens quality (for me). I wouldn't care for the advertised MP but I am aware that it is important to some of us and I know that an increase in resolution seems advantageous in terms of IQ (when viewed at 100% on screen). So I'd go for a m43 camera with a lower resolution than APS-C, FF or medium format even at $1700.

BTW the current micro43 sensors with 20MP have a higher density than my 26MP Fuji, which is already luxurious in my book (when we apply the concept of equivalency). But your mileage may vary. Printwise, i did not see a difference between my X-Pro1 (16MP) and X100V (26MP) images in real world usage. Now, scientifically, that of course will be answered differently.

Sep 14, 2021*permalink

Agree that high MP is not essential. But, OM Digital also can't provide better IQ / dynamic range / ergonomics than old model. Why paid $1700 again for new camera/lens. Better bought same used model if existing gears broken.

So, OM Digital can't earn any profit.

OM Digital hasn't good menu as BMPCC 4K.
OM Digital hasn't native LUTs support like Panasonic GH5.
OM Digital hasn't dual native ISO like Panasonic.
https://na.panasonic.com/us/audio-video-solutions/broadcast-cinema-pro-video/dual-native-iso-camera-technology-cinematic-low-light-video-production
OM Digital hasn't DR200/400 (dual gain) like Fujifilm.
OM Digital hasn't leaf shutter like Fujifilm X100 series.
OM Digital hasn't easy use UI like Canon.

Why paid $1700?

Sep 14, 2021*permalink

Those questions are all relevant on their own term.
However bundled together, that makes no sense at all.
Regarding the $1,700 camera: if the camera bundles unique features like the EM-1 line does, people will pay that $1,700 because they receive a good value for their money. That ultimately depends on your profile. For many here, biggest value point it's shallow depth of field aka bokeh. Then, a E-M1x looks terrible against a a7c.

Sep 15, 2021permalink

4fabian

I wish that they would go the full frame route instead as features like hand-held macro in camera focus stacking just aren't available elsewhere. I wish they were. If they bring out a 40+ MB full frame with the best olympus features, it would be on my shopping list. Right now I use the dated but loveable Olympus Pen-f which I love as a fun camera with a Panasonic Leica 8-15mm lens. For serious work related photography I use full frame as I shoot mostly in low light.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Yes, just what the market needs; a seventh manufacturer in the mirrorless 35mm sensor market. What could they add that can’t be made by powerhouses as Nikon, Canon and Sony?

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Polytropia

Fact: Olympus cameras are full frame relative to 4/3 lenses.
Fact: 35mm is a crop sensor when used with medium format lenses.

Learn math, geometry, and English before posting, people.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Grimstod

I totally agree. I hate it how people miss-use the FF words.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

toneh_bashar

Yes, and make massive lenses that is hard to carry. No thanks. I would rather take my gear out everytime I leave the house.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Weegee

There is plenty of software to eliminate noise or rez up. Enjoy the small lenses of 4/3. More than enough mp.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

glimpsesborrowed

The idea of full frame baffles me...jack of all trades but master of none....medium format and micro four thirds or even C senors are superior for specific subjects.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

The Pen F with the Panasonic 8-18 is a fantastic combinatiion but only because it is significantly smaller and lighter than anything equivalent from Fuji, let alone any FF. Of cousre a full frame camera with a 16-35 will take technically better images but there are already several choices.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

MNE

Referring to 35mm as full frame is like video people talking about “footage” and “filming” 😂

Sep 11, 2021permalink

4fabian

Jer81 - I said specifically "in camera focus bracketing for macro". No other brands except Olympus offer that. Clearly you are not into macro photography - no problem, each to their own. But that is why a 7th brand is needed, at least until one of the existing FF cameras incorporates that technology.

Sep 11, 2021*permalink

Both Panasonic and OM Digital Solutions, IMO, need an new strategic plan on marketing the benefits of MFT as opposed to FF an or APS-C cameras. Personally, I think they should expand it usage beyond targeted ILC cameras type cameras.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

https://www.dpreview.com/news/7826718438/olympus-has-completed-the-sale-of-its-imaging-business-to-jip

It's been around a year, so I think we should wait an see to see what are developments by the new owners as opposed to what was already in the pipeline.

----------------------

Update: The end of an era: Olympus confirms it's completed the sale of its imaging business to JIP
Published Jan 5, 2021 | Gannon Burgett

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Marty4650

I predict that the 40-150mm f/4.0 PRO lens will be a huge hit. It will sell like hotcakes. Just wait and see. Especially if it is a lot smaller and lighter than the f/2.8 version, and priced around a third lower.

The 20mm f/1.4 will also be a commercial success, but will not sell as many copies because it is a specialty lens. Much like the 12mm f/2.0 or 75mm f/1.8 prime lenses. Plus, too many people already own the 20mm f/1.7 and would be reluctant to trade up for the slight speed advantage. The 20mm f/1.7 was among the best selling M4/3 lenses ever made, so there are a lot of them out there.

Overall, this was a very smart move by OMD-S, and sends a strong signal that they intend to be very competitive going forward.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Albert Valentino

Agree 100% that the 40-150 could be a huge hit.. Actually, I think the 8-25 and 40-150 f/4’s could be all one needs. I have the wonderful 12-100 f/4 and used to own the spectacular 40-150 f/2.8 Pro but did not use it often due to size, but used it a lot to shoot flowers and butterflies. My two main lenses are the PL 8-18 and 12-100, but if they get stolen, i can see the 8-25 and 40-150 f/4’s as a practical replacement.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Depends if it's $999 or $1599. But we can predict that it will be very sharp because it isn't difficult to make a medium aperture telephoto zoom.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Marty4650

Both lenses make a lot of sense.

The 40-150mm f/4.0 PRO completes the f/4.0 zoom lens trinity, for those who don't need the fastest apertures but need smaller size and weight lenses. And the 20mm f/1.4 provides a nice alternative to the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens for Olympus shooters who want more speed and faster AF. And this is also a good thing for OMD-S, since both will very likely be high margin products.

In any case, having more options is never a bad thing to have. You don't have to buy all 100 M4/3 AF lenses, but it is nice to know they exist if you need any of them. This is an advantage that some other systems just don't have.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Sa7724473

20mm f1.4 would be deeply welcome.

Problem is, these days the "Pro" label on m43 lenses seems to be shorthand for "we won't even bother with the "micro" in micro-four-thirds"!

If they can get this in and around the size of Panasonic's 25mm f1.4 that would be acceptable. Hopefully they have at least put in that much effort, and are not slapping a "pro" label on what is otherwise an adapted APS-C lens.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Franz Weber

Look at the 12-45 f4.0 Pro lens. That is really tiny.

And i think it is the smallest pro lens money can buy.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Astrotripper

@Osa25

Well, this announcement is exactly opposite of what you're claiming.

I do agree that up to now the PRO lenses were rather uncompromising designs, which was reflected in their size and weight. One reason I was not really interested in them.

However, the 12-45 had proven that they can make lightweight and fairly compact lenses while maintaining top notch image quality. There are no compromises in IQ department with 12-45, which is the hallmark of the PRO lens line. And while it is not a tiny lens, it is still compact and lightweight.

It's hard to tell by the pictures, but the new 40-150 appears to be smaller than 12-100. Probably closer to 12-200 if you'd cut off the bulky front. It's probably not much larger than the plastic fantastic 40-150.

And the 20/1.4 looks a bit smaller than 12-45. Hopefully it would boast similarly impressive close focusing capability.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Astrotripper

Either way, both would make a perfect match for E-M5 sized body.

Which is exactly the point.

E-M5 users were kind of left with not much choice if they wanted WR lenses of highest quality without making their kit awkwardly balanced.

Those two lenses are a step in the right direction.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

I found the 12-45 was a little soft in the corners at 12mm, so I went back to the 8-18. But they certainly got the size, weight and price right on the 12-45.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Jimmmy

For all the doom and gloom comments when Olympus morphed to this OM DS structure, the company seems intent on continuing and growing the product line. The MFT format, with its wonderful IBIS, are great purpose cameras. I've been shooting lately with an old E-M5 mark I body. Paired up with the small Olympus prime lenses, it makes for a powerful system. These new additions are most welcome.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

alffastar

Both lenses are great news! I was hoping to see 25-150 f/4 that will go with 8-25. However, I do realise that the 8-25 f/4 is meant to pair with 12-100 f/4. I also hoped for an updated 9-18 - a small 9-18 f/4 PRO, however, I do not see it on the roadmap. At the same time, the hopefully small an excellent pair of 12-45 and 40-150 f/4 will be a really great combo :)

And 40mm equiv 1.4 and weather resistant - I have been waiting for such a lens for a loooooong time :)

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

kristian1

Olympus still have a camera that looks like camera . well not too much more then that by todays standards sadly..

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Rotto Quokka

As soon as OM Digital Solutions inform the market of their upgrade to the OM-D E-M1X camera including a new sensor in same, I have $150,000 worth of Canon equipment that goes and I change to Olympus.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Welsh

Why on earth would you do that? Do you crave a tiny sensor?

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Rotto Quokka

I'm tired carrying a IDX body plus a 200-400mm lens all day on safari, plus a second body and lens, not to mention trying to get the two roll-on bags of equipment past the check-in people at airports, and I travel business class.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

I fully agree. When travelling or hiking heavy equipment wears one out, both physically and mentally... The lighter, the better!
Both the hiking AND the photgraphying should be fun and relaxing. With heavy and complicated set-ups there are gains on certain aspects of photography, but heavy losses in others. To each his own, of course, but I have so much more fun with a lighter and more compact setup, and getting good results, even in difficult circumstances (by practicing a lot) is rewarding too.

When static or in a studio a FF makes sense, but on the move MFT is so much more convenient. In difficult lighting one has to work around the limitations of a smaller sensor, but other than that, one can get really excellent results from MFT.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Craig from Nevada

LOL--the cult of the full frame sensor ("Do you crave a tiny sensor?") meets the reality baggage limits, aging joints and other inconveniences of travel in the modern world. Just a note--the airline crew with the scales and tape measures don't give a crap about equivalency and Dof.

BTW--as a day hiker, I can report with certainty, that the air at 3,000 meters is thin and seems to get thinner with each passing year. The gear may weigh the same, but seems heavier.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

I shoot 8x10 exclusively. It's really not such a burden if you buy an extra seat.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

TN Args

I'm so proud of these guys for not being the asset stripping liquidators that everyone predicted.

Of course time will tell: they have to turn a profit yet, to be along term survivor, but their *intent* is evidently not what the prophets of doom were so sure of.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Will Olympus be able to sell a pro 40mm F2.8 equivalent lens to resolve a 20MP sensor? It just seems like the firm has its priorities reversed.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

OM Digital Solutions will be able to sell a lot of these I suppose. The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 is quite popular. With one major complain, the slow AF. This one will be better and faster (both in light gathering as in AF). Downside is it will be bigger, but probably still small enough.

The current 20mp sensor is proven able to deliver stunning images.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Why is equivalent aperture important to you? Artistic freedom? Or is it the typical biggest/best/bronko wish?
A modern 20mm f/1.4 will be an awesome seller for the m43 system as there is literally only one option at 40mm fixed and I would pick one up to pair it with an older but still awesome body for a side-system.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

@kreislauf equivalence is improtant because as a buyer you want to know what the images your equipment will create look like. And once you take equivalence into consideration M43 has a really hard time competing with todays FF MILC offerings (apart from tele maybe). You usually get lesser IQ out of a Oly+ fast Pro lens than from a FF+slower/cheaper equivalent lens and in a similarly sized package (neglecting build quality)

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@phouphou , equivalence is understanding that depending on the situation all cameras are actually equivalent. It’s about what camera is best suited to the situation. Those those that buy pro lenses understand exactly what they are buying

With my only em1 mark iii and 171.2 I can routinely shoot 5 second handheld exposures in terrestrial rain. I ha e a usable f1.2 giving me a usable DOF of 2 that is sharp edge to edge and why my Sony a7iii’s stay home a lot of the time.

If I am shooting at base iso where I need to be 6400 to 25600 due to having inferior IBIS and need to stop down to get a usable DOF I know why I’m shooting MFT over my FF system for many applications.

There is no advantage using not only the best in FF Let alone entry level FF crap served up to hacks with sensitive egos if it’s not the best tool for the given job

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@kodacolor200 did i get that right (not easy to read)?: you prefer a 17mmf1.2 over a FF 35mm1.4 because you can handhold the M43 for 5seconds?
Seems like a very rare usecase for most people...
Ask any wedding photog to choose between a M43+17f1.2 vs FF 35f1.4, i'm pretty sure none will pick the M43. Tbh i'd even chose a 35f1.8 over the 17f1.2 since theres plenty of great options for FF MILCs for 1/2 the price of the Oly...

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Actually if you ask me I prefer the rendering yes. As a lens for what it’s actually resolving its a superb lens. I rarely have a use case for 42mp either……

Anyone with an imagination might understand that there are indeed many advantages to this particular ability. however yes handheld night shooting not being restricted by a tripod is indeed advantageous.

Yes you are right about wedding photographers. fortunately I don’t need to shoot weddings, but for capturing motion, FF is certainly better. As I said best tool for the job.

There are advantages to MFT system and it trumps my FF in situations that I now actually depend on it more to make me money for the type of work I make. Having two or three systems or formats is not uncommon.

Most people don’t need FF and would probably enjoy using a Olympus as it is a far better user experience on top of the above advantages me tioned

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

duchamp

To phouphou, it's not always about the best tool for the job but what makes you happy. 2 years ago I downgraded from FF to M43 (check my gear list) but somehow I feel that I upgraded. And I'm definitely shooting and enjoying it much much more.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@duchamp, back when FF meant huge DSLR bodies and lenses, M43 had much more going on for it. Today not so much, since FF doesnt necesarily mean big anymore.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#858.875,840.682,ha,t

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@Just
"un-ergonomical junk" with state of the art AF and image sensor in a small package, unlike anything M43 has to offer right now.
Also plenty of FE bodies to choose from if you want a better grip/EVF, Sony got you covered in every way (+120 native lenses, with new realeases almost weekly).

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@phouphou It is true that the Sony FF camera's are tiny and some MFT (like the GH5 and GH5) are big. But there is more to consider. While the Sony's pack an incredible amount of high tech (AF!), they are not so great in ergonomics. I agree that a Sony in combination with one of those Tamron zooms present a great bang for the buck. If you shoot a lot in very dark circumstances, FF is better of course, but not as much as people often think, because faster lenses on MFT can eat up some of the two stops advantage.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

In general lenses CAN be much smaller and lighter with MFT, particulary so on the long end. It all depends on the camera/lens combo in question. The assumption that MFT is a great deal less capable is an oversimplification IMHO. Just looking at raw specs doesn't paint the whole piucture. One has to go out into the field and work with both systems to appreciate their individual strenght. I use my FF only under difficult circumstances, and only when there's not much walking required. 75% of the time I grab my MFT camera's, because they are more fun to shoot with compared to my A7III. I am very curious to see how the GH6 is going to perform. If it is a substantial improvement, I might sell my FF equipment... If not, I will stick with what I have.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

@JAT: An X-T2 is 507g. The A7III (and presumably A7IV) is 650g. That's not a large difference. And equivalent FF lenses are pretty reasonably sized when you factor in aperture equivalence of say Fuji F2.8 = Sony F4.2 or Fuji F1.2 = Sony F1.8.

I actually looked at Fuji as an alternative, but the ecosystem was FF-priced without the advantages of the larger sensor. The Fujis did offer unique controls and better video, if that's the priority.

Also, what lens is giving you 10mm FF->6.7mm APSC field of view? The widest I can find on the mount is 12mm equivalent, the expensive 8-16mm (12-24mm) F2.8.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

"equivalence is improtant because as a buyer you want to know what the images your equipment will create look like. "

No! I don't care what a potential image would look like on a FF camera when I am out and about on a m34 or 1" system. Literally don't care with how much more blur you can fade out the background in a certain situation. It's not how many of us shoot and a small DOF is NOT a marker of image quality.
Your logical flaw is, that everything smaller than FF is a compromise or a sacrifice. It ain't so.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

MikeB2000

Why do MFT haters spend so much time on this forum? Possibly to justify their choices? I have to wonder how many of them could point out the differences between FF and MFT images taken by professionals, without resorting to pixel peeping.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

duchamp

To Phouphou, when I switched to mft the "award winning" a7iii was already around. I really tried to fall for it because it had (and is) one of the smallest FF bodies with one of the best eye AF for a very approachable price and also because it has a mature and diverse lens system. But its ergonomics, button placement, menu arrangement and abuse of acronyms turned me away. I am not saying never to Sony but in order to win my heart (and my wallet) they must make it fun to use .

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@JAT: That 16-55mm F2.8 is more expensive than the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8, and only 200g lighter. The Tamron 28-78mm F2.8 is cheaper and lighter, albeit with slightly less sharpness and 4mm on the wide end. The early Sony F4s are more or less obsolete with what has been released since.

It's fine to like Fuji for being unique, but their prices are kinda crazy vs. the competition these days.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

MikeB2000

In my post above, I should have said, "Why do MFT haters spend so much time commenting on MFT articles." But some hang out on the MFT forum, too.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

@Mike, people like to comment on products they think are silly on these articles; it's just part of DPR culture.

M43 gets ragged on for being dead/equivalence. Sony FE gets criticism for handling. Nikon Z gets criticism for lens selection and dying. Canon RF gets criticism for price. Fuji gets criticism for price/equivalence. Pentax gets criticism for existing. Etc.

https://xkcd.com/386/

Edit: Forgot Leica and price, in a major way.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

I mean, you're "defending" a camera brand that you don't use online with anger. Glass houses and stones, hmm? ;)

And why would you exclude Tamron glass? It's awesome and one of the big reasons to go with E mount. If it wasn't for glass I'd be shooting Nikon or something.

We literally can't provide equivalents to the lenses in the range you're talking about, as you haven't listed them. And equivalents probably don't exist, as those lenses are likely slower than FF offerings. So it's a trade-off. For me personally Fuji didn't make sense at those prices (I dabbled with one Fuji body but later sold it after pricing out the lens lineup), but friends enjoy the XF system.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Brent the fact there are many MFT users also own FF cameras systems (much longer than you and likely more extensive and current) maybe suggests that you lack the actual experience or ability to understand advantages of other formats. If you lack the imagination required to see benefit, this only amplifies a naive and narrow mindset. Unfortunately this mindset rarely lends well to creativity.

I find the overwhelming majority of people taking such nonsense about FF are actually very pedestrian and inexperienced in their approach to making images with a camera. It’s like you have never actually made a print of and image that actually requires the specs you measurebate over. This differences are negligee in the majority of use cases. In many use cases today - a smaller format is the superior choice.

You preach about value and FF and yet insist on overkill for 99% of use cases . That’s an inexperienced view.

Sep 11, 2021*permalink

KoolKool

olympus pro lenses already outsolved the current old 20mp sensor, sadly

Sep 10, 2021permalink

what does that even mean?

Sep 10, 2021permalink

he thinks they should introduce a >20MP sensor.
I doubt one would see a difference in resolution/sharpness because of diffraction in most situations (especially when stopping the lens down to f2.8 or more)

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@phouphou: Diffraction isn't a problem with MFT up to F11 IMHO. With some lenses it starts earlier, with some a little later. Between F0.95 and F8 it generally isn't noticable.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

@Lucas1964, if only we knew when diffraction kicks in on a higher than 20MP M43 sensor...
Interestingly the 1.2/17 Oly hits peak sharpness @f2 already and i quote: "Diffraction effects set in beyond f/2 but they aren't overly noticeable until f/8 really." Would we see a difference in sharpness at lets say f4 with more MP? I'm really not sure -- especially not with lenses f4 and slower.
https://www.opticallimits.com/m43/1082-olympus17f12?start=1

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

They should introduce a 30mp sensor because there's no point spending money on ads that say "And it still has the same, perfectly adequate 20mp sensor."

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Petercatt

Can someone go to the OMDS web page, scroll down to "Lenses That Deliver", and explain that illustration to me. Unless OMDS has invented a completely new optical material that can bend light in a weird way, it makes no sense to me.
https://cameras.olympus.com/advantage/en/

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Petercatt

I know what telecentricity is. But that illustration is not how it works. Light doesn't enter a lens, sidestep to the perimeter, then exit in the same direction like that.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

LJ - Eljot

It is not a very good illustration. The whole optical system is represented by a single convex lens, which makes it, well, wrong.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

snapa

Olympus does not need more lenses, it needs a new and greatly improved m4/3 sensor for their next camera. What year was it that they improved on their imaging sensor technology?

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Terrible Photographer

As a commercial shooter who's deep into Oly, I agree. The 20mm should have been a 12mm, but whatever, Panasonic's is pretty good.

I'd love a more competitive chip that can trade blows with what's in the D500.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

duchamp

Computational photography is the way to go. I'd like to see IPhone/Samsung S photography brains in an mft camera.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

photofan1986

Well, that "old" sensor is still pretty green not even a stop away from the D500. Considering the extremely effective Ibis in the m43 bodies, that difference is pretty negligible if not reversed.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Terrible Photographer

Yeah for some stuff, like studio work or architecture, or jobs where I have the time and ability to use HR mode, I'd totally agree.

It's when I'm shooting lifestyle work, or ad work where I don't have the time to lock the camera down and I have do deal with the malleability limits of micro 4/3rds.

80% of the time it's not a problem, it's the 20% where it is that makes me wish there was just a little bit more. Might be replacing my aging D800 for the new GFX 50S mk2 to close that gap if the CDAF is fast enough for lifestyle. I really like the 4:3 ratio, and my time with the Z's didn't impress me much over what the OMD provides me.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

IMO 20mm is the sweet spot FL for a walkaround lens in MFT. Very good news from Olympus (or whatever they call it now).

Sep 9, 2021permalink

The Ricoh GRiiix fits in your pocket, offers better image quality (APSC) and has just a 1stop slower eqiv lens...
And probably the 20 f1.4 PRO lens alone will be more expensive than the GR too...

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

Image quality is less than half a stop. The GR is a 2.8 which negates any real IQ advantages anyway. Then there is the build quality

I have owned a few Ricoh GR’s they are great. The thing is I have owned a few because they break. If what you are proposing is that the GR is somehow better value, it’s far from it. Great camera and certainly convenient, however not the most reliable.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

@kodak: i read "walkaround" and figured street photography. Thats where IMO a GR that offers almost the same equiv. f-stop and probably similar or better image quality seems like a better choice. First and foremost because its unobtrusive tho.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

I have thought of owning a GR but no VF, no articulating screen and no possibility to attatch a longer lens for the occasional tighter shot stopped me. I can't deny that it's a compelling choice for those who are willing to cope with the drawbacks, though.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

The 20/1.4 will be several hundred dollars less than a GR III. But it will be considerably more expensive than the Panasonic 20/1.7.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Understandably so.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

HRC2016

It's been more than a year since I bought my last piece of gear, the Olympus 100-400. It's been a great lens.

I bought that lens after holding off on gear purchases for at least a year. So when the 100-400 was for sale I had no financial qualms.

I'm not seeing anything of interest on this roadmap. If I never buy another lens in my lifetime I'll still be able to take great images with the gear I have.

That said, I'm glad to see new products announced for the m43 system, and hopefully they will be for sale some day (probably close to $2,000 though).

Buying gear doesn't make you a photographer. It makes you a consumer.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Petercatt

"If I never buy another lens in my lifetime I'll still be able to take great images with the gear I have."
The vast majority of photographers could say the same.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

tedolf

What I want is an el cheapo, light, plastic, 100mm f/2.8 that I can get on sale for $99.00. If Oly can do it with the fantastic plastic 40-150mm they can do this.

90mm would be OK too if it kept the size/cost down

Tedolph

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Mk82

Olympus has two macro lenses already:

The first one for mFT system was 60 mm f/2.8 Macro capable for 1:1 (as Macro dictates).
The second one for mFT system was 30 mm f/3.5 Macro capable for 1.25:1, so 1.25x of lifetime (subject is 1.25x larger on imagine plane).

The key thing with these lenses is 2x FOV factor. So you know instantly that if you need wider background or narrower background that do you pick up the 30 mm or 60 mm.

The only logical and best version for a additional Macro lens for longer working distance would be another 2x FOV factor lens, hence the 120 mm. You would have instantly three great choices to carry, 30 / 60 / 120 mm lenses.
And 120 mm macro should be f/4 to be small size and lightweight because Macro needs to be moved around tight spaces and long working distance is required for not scaring small insects away, and DOF is anyways compromising, why f/4 is problematic anyways as gets stopped down to f/8-11 ranges (ie. 60mm f/2.8 doesn't lose sharpness).

Sep 9, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

Years ago I had an M43 camera with the Panasonic 45-200mm lens. I always though that was a great range I wished there would be an F/2.8 or F/4 model. The Olympus 40-150/2.8 looked nice but didn't grab my interest because I alway found 150 to be a little short for my needs (same with 300mm on FF). Then Panasonic came though with the 50-200 2.8-4. I never had a chance to get one since I don't own an M43 camera anymore. But I would prefer Olympus had made this a 75-200, or even a 75-250/4.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

They've actually got multiple somethings like that on the roadmap, I'm more curious about those as well.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

The PL 50-200 is a dream come true; light, compact, sturdy, smooth and tack sharp. Never thought the combination of all these virtues would see the daylight, but eventually it did. This lens alone is reason to invest in MFT.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

I've got a couple bugbears with the PL50-200 that I think an Oly version could address or challenge, although I do think it looks fantastic and when it came out I was pleasantly surprised that they managed to keep it near the size of the 100-300 (with the TC it could very well replace one and play dual roles).

My small beef(s) w/the PL50-200: no lens collar option (I use the 3rd party Roesch one on my 100-300 II *a lot*) and Pana makes it harder than it should be to buy either TC for it in the US but not officially selling them separate from the PL200. On an even more minor note, the rendering isn't as nice as that of the 35-100 but they have different use cases so that's fine.

I'd love to see Oly try a 50-200 or 50-250 since they've never done one... And they seem to have something like that on the roadmap. 50-250 F4 w/lens collar and TC compatibility would have me shooting my E-M5 III a lot more again.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Oh and also, y'know, the price... It is what it is and I'd bite that bullet if I was gonna use the PL50-200 a ton but since I won't and since my larger body is an OM-D then an Oly lens would be convenient (for Sync IS and Pro Capture compatibility if nothing else). I think Oly could undercut Pana here as in the case of the 100-400s tho...

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

borissimo86

20mm (40mm equivalent) is a good choice. I would like 15mm (30mm equivalent) even more.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

photofan1986

We already have the PL15 1.7

Sep 9, 2021permalink

borissimo86

We also have the Pana 20 1.7. It's good to have choices. I prefer the rendering of Olympus Pro primes.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Jimmmy

Olympus 12mm f/2.0 -- small, lightweight. Was out shooting with it today on my 16 mp E-M1 mark i body.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Cornflake7

@Jimmy: the 12mm is sometimes too wide. We need a 14mm F1.4 prime as well.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Jimmmy

14mm f/1.4 would be larger and heavier than my 12mm f/2. My back and knees would not be happy. The 12mm f/2.0 works quite well with the e-m5 mark i, still remarkably capable several iterations past.

Sep 11, 2021permalink

dmanthree

Really good news for Oly and m4/3 in general. Still an excellent and complete system.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Interesting. I have Olympus bodies but almost all Panasonic lenses. Olympus has nothing like the Panasonic 35-100/2.8 which is sized for a m43 camera, yet very sharp.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Anastas Tarpanov

They have 40-150mm. I use it all the time for events, concerts, sports... yes it's bigger and heavier, but the additional 100mm eq is something that is missing from all other systems.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

EZGritz

The 40-150 f/2.8 is essential. With the TC's and the 12-45 it's a great compact, lightweight 2 lens system, everything I need for motorsports photography. I'm going to guess the new 40-150 will not use the TCs. If it does I'll buy it. I like shooting f/4. I shoot f/11 at the track a lot and don't need anything faster. It will take a half-pound out of my kit.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

The 35-100 is really unique within and outside the system, both of the 35-100s are actually. I'm curious to see how small any of Oly's future Pro teles can get, they've never emphasized smaller designs as much as Pana but the 12-45 looked like a really good compromise in that vein. I'm more curious about the other options that might reach 200-250 as I find 150mm kind of no man's land for my uses, but that's really subjective.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Terrible Photographer

I was never really impressed with the 35-100 f/2.8 outside of the size. The 40-150 Pro is optically superior.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

EZGritz

Impulses: I love the 12-45. It's much lighter than the 12-40. I shoot in good light most of the time and f/4 gives me a DOF I like. The 40-150 range works well for me. The 12-100 is too short and not lightweight for the range and speed. It is loved by people who own it. Since the 40-150 is f/2.8 and I shoot f/5.6-f/11 in the range the TC's work great. I have both which brings me to 56-420 f/4 and 80-300 f/5.6. Just great. No other system delivers this IQ, this range and this size/weight. If I had to name one thing that keeps me in the system its the 40-150 f2.8 PRO and the TCs. I don't see anything else from any supplier that competes directly with it. It's a semi-macro too. It focuses close enough that if I'm shooting something distant at 150 and a bee lands on a flower I can take a close-up of the bee. I can be shooting a race car 50 yards away and a fly on a leaf with the same lens. Its as versatile as any lens I tried.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Anastas Tarpanov

If you shoot outdoors f/4 lenses are good, for anything indoors or in low light situations f/2.8 is essential. f/2 zooms will be better, but I'm afraid it will going to be huge. That said both Pana 10-25 and 25-50 f/1.7 are amazing lenses for events.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

At Terrible Photographer; Then you probably have the older version. The mark II is so much sharper. It schouldn't be, but it really is.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

^ Or he just looked at a bum sample, there was no optical change between the original 35-100 f2.8 and the Mk II, at all, it was updated aesthetically and for Dual IS II and I think there were some changes with regards to aperture control smoothness during video but that was it AFAIK.

" I was never really impressed with the 35-100 f/2.8 outside of the size. The 40-150 Pro is optically superior. "

Most reviews I've seen put them on much more even ground (keeping in mind many of the 35-100 reviews were done on older bodies) and I actually like the Pana's rendering better, I've shot it next to my 75/1.8 which is no slouch and there's not much in it between 'em...

Sep 10, 2021permalink

KAAMBIC

Good to see. With Sony planning a stacked sensor, im glad to see more MFT development rather than it dying off, it's such a good system. Still got my EM1-II and G9, still rooting for MFT to do well.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

Usually there is one sensor both Panasonic and Olympus use. I am sure that keeps costs down. I bet both the GH6 and future OM cameras use the new stacked sensor while low cost bodies use the 20MP sensor a little while longer.

So the good news is there will be two or more M43 cameras with the new stacked sensor, and while the GH6 maybe up to $2500, there will definitely be at least one in the $1600-$1900 range in the next year. Very likely an OM and a G9 mark II.

Since M43 already is ahead of everyone with IBIS, hi Res modes, and pre-capture modes (buffering images BEFORE shutter is pressed), this new sensor will add to those advanced features.

M43 always seems to be ahead of everyone else with tech. First mirrorless, first 5 axis IBIS, first hand held hi res in a mirrorless camera, first mirrorless pre-capture, etc.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

The stacked sensor will be expensive in the first models but that will change as it happens to every piece of electronics. I am pretty satisfied with the current generation of m43 cameras but a stacked sensor won't hurt (maybe my wallet will be lighter for a while).

Sep 9, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

They say the cost of sensors is exponential vs size. A FF sensor costs about 4 times what an M43 sensor costs make. My guess is a stacked sensor costs 2-4 times what a standard FF sensor costs to make.
So an M43 stacked sensor still might cost less than normal FF sensor.
But I am sure like you said, at first these cameras will have high prices. The GH6 is said to be $2500. That is still 1/2 or less than a FF camera with a stacked sensor. I am sure we will see M43 cameras with stacked sensors under $2000 and they'll have features FF cameras do not have like hand held high resolution.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Passereau

Stacked sensor enhance ISO or image quality for photography ? Not sure at all. I will not go m43 without a BSI sensor. I don't want 43Mpix, i want better low light performance like Fuji sensors.

Sep 13, 2021permalink

KAAMBIC

I don't know if a stacked sensor will improve sensor output directly but it will allow faster scan times. This means less rolling shutter in silent mode, and much more effective image stacking modes, which do improve IQ greatly. Less rolling shutter is a huge benefit for video too as i would include it in "video IQ".

Sep 13, 2021permalink

Passereau

Right, rolling shutter is important, but low light ? Really m43 is not good on that point i don't see any improvement in that direction with the NEW sensor...

Sep 14, 2021*permalink

atamola

This is really good news.

I recently downsized my camera gear (sold: Nikon D800, Fuji X100F, Nikon F100 all Nikon lenses, speedlights, etc.) and kept only my OM-D E-M5 (and an old voigtlander my brother gave as a gift) because it's still very good for me.

Happy to see the new owners have plans.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

MyReality

You are a brave soul and must have good reasons for doing this. I like versatility when I am not traveling. When I travel in the future, I will go small and light.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

atamola

"You are a brave soul "... you made me laugh ;-)
What can I say? I really liked the camera when it came out and I still do :-)

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Rodrigo Pasiani

Is the 20 f/1.4 like a 40/2.8, but big and expensive? (Just to start a war).

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Astrotripper

It's like Sigma 45mm f/2.8 but longer, weather sealed, with much better "macro" capability and much less vignetting.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Looks closer to the size of a 55/1.8 or 35/1.8 than to the size of the Sigma 45/2.8 or Samyang 45/1.8 (which is about the size of the PL25/1.4, there's a decent bit of overlap here between formats IMO)... But it's about high time M4/3 had a smaller and wider prime with sealing, kinda amusing that it's still not a 17/1.4 but I always liked 20mm myself.

It'll be interesting to see how OMDS prices it and what kinda balance they strike vs the f1.2 Pros, the PL25 walked that fine line a little better for people who like more compact gear but it wasn't as sharp wide open, I liked it a lot tho and it's been a while so I imagine Oly has some new design tricks to leverage vs what Pana was capable of back then.

Should pair just as well with the 56/1.4 IMO.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Platinumkid

I wanna see them make a 10mm f/2.0 lens. Would be a great vlogging combo with M5III.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Karroly

There is already an Oly 12mm F2.0.
Why would you need a 10mm for vlogging ?
You like distorted faces ?

Sep 9, 2021permalink

If you don't need AF then the Laowa is a fine 10/2, shouldn't need to be refocusing to maintain DoF for vlogging anyway. I like my 12/2 but new ones are grossly overpriced IMO.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Platinumkid

Karroly, I find 12mm too tight for vlogging. Impulses, I think you need AF for vlogging. At least I do.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Mk82

Distorted face doesn't come from a wide angle lens, it comes from the shorter distance between face and camera than 2.5 meters. If someone takes seriously the portraiture, selfies and such, then they should place the camera over 3-4 meters from their face and get a proper lens to get their needed framing like Olympus 60 mm or 75 mm.

The common FOV of 28 degrees gives a distance of only 2 meters for a 85 x 56 cm framing. That is common portrait framing but using a FOV of 18.2 degree gives a distance of 3.3 meters. And even that is too short as psychological tests has shown that 4-5 meters is the most memorable and attractive distance for person face. It is the perspective that humans remembers and recall other people faces, details etc. And that requires FOV of 12.3 degrees for a 80 x 55 cm framing.

And who is guessing what is that lens that gives 12.35 degrees on Small Format? It is a 200 mm lens.
The other two were 135 mm and 85 mm respectively.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

NowHearThis

@Platinumkid, I'd like a 10/2 as well; I don't do vlogging but I could find a ton of other uses for one. I know there's MF lenses out there but I hate MF only lenses and will never use again. I'll use MF at times but not all the time.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

MK82: Many vloggers aren't really going for the most pleasing FL tho so they throw all that out the window, you may not agree with it but that's not gonna change anything for those vlogging on the go... I think you can get by just fine w/MF if you just want you face in focus and aren't swinging your camera around wildly tho, OTOH if you're trying to refocus while on the go between your face and the background then yeah you might need AF...

That always feels awkward even with AF tho, I can see why some would want to do so to save on prep and editing time but eh, at that point why not just go with a P&S and cut down on your setup complexity even more, or simply w/the 12/2 (don't buy it new tho). For a home vlog setup with a proper shooting space I don't really see why you'd go that wide, it does look worse and or gimmicky IMO, eg Unbox Therapy.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Vlogging aside, if you're mostly shooting stills I think it's worth trying the Laowas, AF would be nice but it's not critical and MF is not that hard at those FLs; and I say that knowing I'm being a bit hypocritical btw...

I was glad to gain AF on my FF Sony 20/1.8 G heh, but I also got by just fine w/my Laowa 7.5/2, it was the bulk/price of the Voigtlander 10/0.95 that I couldn't stomach along w/MF. I might've traded in my 7.5 and/or 12/2 for the Laowa 10/2 if I was still shooting wide w/M4/3 when that came out.

Those Laowas are a gift to the system imo, M4/3 might've never had small UWA primes at all if not for them and I don't see Oly or Pana doing some small ones, I think if if they ever do one it'll probably be a faster/larger f1.4 so they can sell it at more of a premium.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Karroly

MK82,
"Distorted face doesn't come from a wide angle lens, it comes from the shorter distance between face and camera than 2.5 meters."
Yes...and no !
At the same short distance, a wider lens distorts more...

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Andyyy

It's nice to see new developments are coming, hopefully in good quality.
I just don't know why they did not found a better brand name for the new "company".

OM Digital sounds too industrial.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

The lenses are called M.Zuiko juist like before. That's a good name. No idea what will be branded on te camera's.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Ab Latchin

I have been eyeballing the 20mm panasonic, but the slightly slower focus kinda put me off. I am often a little uncomfortable with 17mm (35) but often find 25mm a little too tight. I think this 20mm is going to be a great sweet spot for me.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

you would love the new GR IIIx then.

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Ab Latchin

Is it weather sealed?

Sep 10, 2021permalink

Now Olympus has a different owner you can still call it Olympus. Not so much has changed and you don't call a Pentax a Ricoh, now do ye? Or a Nikon a Mitsubishi?

Sep 9, 2021permalink

hikerdoc

Are we not talking three totally distinct scenarios? Olympus selling photography division now as independent OMD company; Ricoh owning rights to Pentax as a brand name for a camera line; Nikon an independent company which is part of Mitsubishi keiretsu. For camera naming nothing has changed, for corporate names we have OMD, Ricoh, and Nikon.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

Mk82

OMD Solution is fairly quick pacing going to be abandoning Olympus brand. They will start to call cameras with something own, and we don't see Olympus anymore written on bodies or lenses.

Would you still be calling those as Olympus if body example reads "OMD"?

Sep 9, 2021permalink

SDreamer

I came here expecting major bashing on OM Digital for such choice of new lenses but was pleasantly surprised at the support and want for such lenses. It is so much more positive than comments elsewhere. That said, I too am interested in a 40-150 f4 that is compact. If that is just slightly larger than the 40-150 kit, and reasonably priced I may get it. I loved the size of the kit so much I almost wanted to repurchase it (especially since it goes for 100$ so often). Going to have to see how this one goes. The 20mm 1.4 is interesting, but it does not look compact enough. Judging by the number of rings on the focus ring, it looks like a chopped off 25mm 1.2. I welcome the weather sealing, but I wish they'd make the 17mm 1.4 weather sealed since that's so compact and pretty much a perfect size for street photography.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

The 17/1.8 you mean? There's never been a 17/1.4 from either brand, Pana did weather seal the PL25/1.4 II and I bought it almost just cause of that. I don't expect they'll ever update the molds for the old metal primes tbh, which is a shame, 12/2, 17/1.8, and 75/1.8 should've been sealed from the start for what they ran. I still love the 75 and my GX850 (where I use it the most) isn't sealed anyway.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

I would love to see a 7 or 8mm 1.8 or 2.0 lightweight prime. Doesn't need to be a pro, but I guess some will like that too. Not more expensive than the 12mm 2.0. That one should be cheaper too. It would make Olympus so much more attractive.

Sep 9, 2021*permalink

s1oth1ovechunk

I think you're stuck with the laowa, probably forever?

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Probably for the foreseeable future, UWA primes (much as I like em) are pretty niche, even more so than primes in general. Oly seems to be focusing on what they should've focused a while ago, teles that leverage the system's strengths and smaller sealed primes that the system has always lacked.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

dpkoop

The 8mm 1.8 can be live-defished in camera (e-m1 ii, iii, x, e-m5 iii), and it‘s small and sealed.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

s1oth1ovechunk

And is wider than 8mm rectilinear when defished.
It's something like wide 6.5mm. medium 7.5mm. and narrow 9.5mm.
Except I think olympus' software does better de-fishing than the in-camera job...

Sep 9, 2021permalink

Doing it in post has it's advantages, with other software you can even choose different projections that can handle or mask UWA distortion better (like Panini)...

The big advantage of having Oly's defish feature is it even works in live view so you can get a much better idea of the final crop right in the field, that makes shooting a FE with the goal of going rectilinear (or something else) much more practical IMO.

I wish I'd gotten a chance to try it but I'm not shooting wide on M4/3 much anymore so the Oly Pro fisheye is off my wishlist, I'd been looking for a deal on a refurb tho. It's worth considering depending on use case if you really want UWA w/AF.

The Laowas are worth a look too even if you don't like MF tho, it's not that big a bother at those FLs.

Sep 10, 2021*permalink

JasonTheBirder

I would love to get a 40-150 f/4 pro. I already find the kit 40-150 nice on my G9 but the corners are visible weak even without pixel peeping, and an f/2.8 is too much lens for my lightweight needs.

Sep 9, 2021permalink

If you can live with a little less telephoto, the Panasonic 35-100-/2.8 is small, light, and very sharp. It's five times the cost of the 40-150 kit zoom, but also five times better.

Sep 9, 2021permalink