New Olympus Rumours

F

FA Limited

missing in action
Local time
4:34 AM
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
835
Seems implausible to me ... and no mention of primes?

--

Hello!

Just have read on a Russian serious photo news blog the new rumors about the m4/3 cameras and lenses from Olympus. I really really hope this will come true becuase they are surprising and great!
1. There will be TWO (!) cameras, not only one. One is M-1, will have a weather-sealed body, 3.2-inch display, HD-video record (720p, 1080i, 1080p) and will be come on the market with the lens 12-45/2.4-3.5 (filter diameter 62mm, weight 410gr)
2. The second is M-100, which we all have seen as a mock-up - will obiviously have no weather sealing and have the kit lens 14-70/3.5-5.6
3. There will also be a new tele-lens 45-150/2.8-4 (filter diameter 62mm and weight 550gr)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=30764279
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://photogenius.ru/news/5157/&sl=ru&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
 
That 12-45 lens is interesting and the weight seems to be along the lines of what you would expect for a 24-90 zoom with a large aperture. The M100 firecracker thing is what I would be interested in, a real nice complement to a full sized camera, even if it did not have a EVF I would be interested as long as it was nice and compact.

I hope we see more pro spec stuff from m4/3, like this rumored 12-45 lens, thats a nice aperture range to have for a general use lens.

I think we will see a something new from Olympus on the m4/3 front and at least one of the prospect lenses that Panasonic announced at least by PMA this year.

But just because I know someone will say it even though its not the most practical move for a new system pointed to the middle of the photo market....."give us more primes!"
 
With out EVF, I don't see any reason for one. I want to use legacy lenses and could care less about what Olympus makes for it.

I want a camera that looks like a PEN FT not another brick you hold out at arms length or looks like a Faux-dSLR.
 
Yeah, I am holding out for a non-SLR-styled camera with in-body stabilization and an EVF. That said, the G1 looks less ugly to me every day, especially with old lenses on it.
 
Really depends on how big the lenses are. The size of the prototype seemed good but hanging a big zoom off it takes away the appeal. I would think this is obvious, even to a camera company. If the lens could be equal to or smaller than the depth of the body, great.

That little body begs for a little pancake lens, preferably something wide like which would hit somewhere around the 28-35 equivalent in 35mm. If they could do a short zoom, great. Frankly once you get to around 20mm (40mm equivalent) I'm out (though since I like my film cameras I'm not really the target market).
 
Too bad Oly didn't start with "M3" ;)

I'm almost certain that this year I'm buying my first digital camera, and it'll be a micro 4/3. If the M-1 has body IS, that would put it at the top of my list, EVF or not. I would probably stick with the kit lens most of the time (as it looks pretty decent), pick up the Pany 20/1.7 for a compact prime, and use an M-adapter for telephoto needs.
 
nightfly said:
Really depends on how big the lenses are. The size of the prototype seemed good but hanging a big zoom off it takes away the appeal. I would think this is obvious, even to a camera company. If the lens could be equal to or smaller than the depth of the body, great.

That little body begs for a little pancake lens, preferably something wide like which would hit somewhere around the 28-35 equivalent in 35mm. If they could do a short zoom, great. Frankly once you get to around 20mm (40mm equivalent) I'm out (though since I like my film cameras I'm not really the target market).
Click to expand...

i totally agree. the mockup showed a small prime, which i had hope was a start of a family of primes and now hearing about zooms has been a bit of a downer.

would be a sick kit to have a small m4/3 body + pana 20mm 1.7 + film rf + 35mm + 50mm + m adapter...
 
johnastovall said:
With out EVF, I don't see any reason for one. I want to use legacy lenses and could care less about what Olympus makes for it.

I want a camera that looks like a PEN FT not another brick you hold out at arms length or looks like a Faux-dSLR.
Click to expand...

I like the Pen look of the M100, but I'd rather have a swing/tilt LCD if I can't have a EVF. Oh well, just have to shoot it like a Bessa T with the capability of image capture review.

.

It looks like Panisonic wins this round.


/
 
I dont see why everyone has high hopes of prime lenses, they are not in demand by the majority of people who buy "cheaper" cameras like this and even many pros who I know would not bother with prime lenses and still use zooms on their canon/nikon/sony dslr's just because its easier and people are lazy.
 
Why wouldn't they make prime lenses? First, they're in business to sell such things and second, they've already done it with the initial 4/3rds effort. Olympus, Panasonic and even Sigma have prime lens offerings for the 4/3rds system.

I would guess that is is a certainty that primes will become available for micro 4/3rds.
 
Avotius said:
I dont see why everyone has high hopes of prime lenses, they are not in demand by the majority of people who buy "cheaper" cameras like this and even many pros who I know would not bother with prime lenses and still use zooms on their canon/nikon/sony dslr's just because its easier and people are lazy.
Click to expand...

Because Primes allow better exploitation of the advantages of the m43 system, ie small size compared to DSLR's and high IQ and High ISO performance compared to compacts. Primes are smaller and typically faster than zooms, allowing for a smaller package that's better in low light.
 
mawz said:
Because Primes allow better exploitation of the advantages of the m43 system, ie small size compared to DSLR's and high IQ and High ISO performance compared to compacts. Primes are smaller and typically faster than zooms, allowing for a smaller package that's better in low light.
Click to expand...

common knowledge in these parts. And with adapters a m4/3 camera owner can use available prime lenses. However, I think what Avo' is saying is that the initial intended audience for the format doesn't want a prime lens. And he's right, IMO.

For example, the G1 as it is being sold is not intended for the guy with Nikon D300 necktie who uses a penlight to examine lenses at camera swaps, nor is it intended for the bokeh-at-any-cost enthusiast. The intended audience will most likely buy the 45-200 zoom to complement the 14-45 kit lens and call it a day.

However, that's what makes Pani's offering of the 20/1.7 so intriguing. Seems like they've tossed us lens-examining and bokeh-chasing types a frickin bone. Along with all these adapters, I think they're hoping we can salvage m4/3 for them if this whole soccer mom thing doesn't pan out :) (a hedge). We're getting our "frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their frickin' heads!" :)


/
 
JohnM said:
Why wouldn't they make prime lenses? First, they're in business to sell such things and second, they've already done it with the initial 4/3rds effort. Olympus, Panasonic and even Sigma have prime lens offerings for the 4/3rds system.

I would guess that is is a certainty that primes will become available for micro 4/3rds.
Click to expand...

Maybe those primes aren't selling?
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
Maybe those primes aren't selling?
Click to expand...

The 25 Pancake definitely seems to be popular. But there's such an utter lack of short prime options in 4/3rds that its not funny. Only two reasonably priced ones, neither of which are faster than f2.8. Nothing wider than a 40mm equivalent (And that's a monster 35mm FF design).

The only lenses faster than f2 in the system are one excellent but high-priced Leica and a few Sigma designs intended for larger formats that are all bloody huge and rather long (apart from the 20/1.8 which is only huge). 4/3rds is not a prime shooters system for the most part. m43 is exactly the opposite, many of the systems advantages screwm out for a set of pancake primes a la Pentax's DA limiteds. A set of 7.5mm f4, 16mm f3.2, and 35mm f2.4 pancakes would be a killer match for a G1 and the upcoming 20/1.7. Focal lengths chosen to match Pentax's 21 and 70 DA limiteds and the upcoing 15 DA Limited.
 
I actually think people like us (this forum) ARE the intended audience. Your general audience is better off with a point and shoot with a built in zoom, they don't want interchangeable lenses and the hassle that entails. Your DSLR enthusiast with the my zoom is bigger than yours mentality is going to go for a Nikon or a Canon in all of their infinite varieties. Why sacrifice for a smaller sensor and fewer lenses?

While the G1 seems intended for people who generally want a DSLR but a bit smaller, the Olympus seems intended for people who in years past would have bought a rangefinder. They want small, they want the biggest possible sensor, but they want good interchangeable lenses.

Honestly I don't think there is much of a market for this new Olympus Micro 4/3 effort but if there is a market, people like us are a big part of it. Hopefully they will come out with some good stuff before they realize how small the market is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom