Dunsun wrote:OM does specialize on wildlife + macro. So there will be no 14mm.Actually this is m4/3 system's strength : tele, macro , video, portability. Any manufacturer which builds m4/3 cameras should take this in consideration, focus on this type of photography.And it's not OMS. Actually Olympus started this when they released stuff like E-M1X, 300mm F/4.0 and 150-400mm F/4.5.As Olympus user for 15 years I was frustrated at the begining that Olympus did not invested enough energy in wildlife/macro segment. But in the last 6-7 years Olympus did the right thing.But finnally there are just 3-4 lenses for wildlife and so many lenses for general photography. For me is funny to find out there are users which think m4/3 is too wildlife orientated.

glassoholic wrote: [...] A PL 10-25 or 8-18 does not replace a semi wide, compact and reasonably fast prime. [...]What exactly do you mean by "semi wide"?I consider the PL to be a reasonably compact and fast zoom, with IQ matching primes in that range.The PL 12/1.4 prime is more compact, and even faster, and its AoV is what I'd call "semi wide".

No text.

glassoholic wrote:Dunsun wrote:Guys I think you are just dreaming.There is no Olympus anymore. It's just the past. OM does specialize on wildlife + macro. So there will be no 14mm.Actually that's a main reason why I partly moved to Fujifilm. I do not see any bright future for Pen F II like cameras and new portrait, street lenses.CheersWell, OMDS did already do a 20mm f1.4 (semi wide angle) which many would find good for street work.Yea it was passable as a mild street walking lens but not for gritty get stuck into it street work, a far cry from a FF 28 mm Zone  focusing the Panasonic version was a better choice

EarthQuake wrote:A 12mm lens is closer at about 27mm when accounting for the aspect ratio difference. And there's good news, we already have a 12/1.4 with weather sealing from Panasonic if someone wants that ~28mm look.Sadly it's not fully weather sealed:https://www.panasonic.com/global/consumer/lumix/technologies/LeicaDG_lens_story/h-x012.html"* Dust and Splash Resistant does not guarantee that damage will not occur if this lens is subjected to direct contact with dust and water."Contrast that with OM's willingness to show cameras and Pro lenses being literally rinsed off under the shower.

Toni Genes wrote:90mm F/3.5 is too slow for portraitsIt provides enough background separation out of the box just work with background which is vital for portraits anyway. Bokeh plays more important role here than (plain) background blur.

Dunsun wrote:Guys I think you are just dreaming.There is no Olympus anymore. It's just the past.Meanwhile all the Vietnam factory workforce and 90% of R&D and management staff in Japan are the same ppl from Oly digital division.OM does specialize on wildlife + macro. So there will be no 14mm.OMDS also targets adventurers and anyone who can benefit from smaller form factor with reliable sealing. This is why the 20mm (sealed) prime was released and more will follow).Actually that's a main reason why I partly moved to Fujifilm. I do not see any bright future for Pen F II like cameras and new portrait, street lenses.More sealed primes are in the works. I am sure one of them will be out in Q2 2023 along with the sealed RF camera body (an OM-5 in Pen form factor).

Steve Balcombe wrote:Sadly it's not fully weather sealed:https://www.panasonic.com/global/consumer/lumix/technologies/LeicaDG_lens_story/h-x012.html"* Dust and Splash Resistant does not guarantee that damage will not occur if this lens is subjected to direct contact with dust and water."Contrast that with OM's willingness to show cameras and Pro lenses being literally rinsed off under the shower.That's marketing well done. It's typical that consumer products are not GUARANTEED to be weather resistant. IP1X from Olympus does not really guarantee anything more than Panasonics disclaimer, despite what their marketing material shows.Things changed with OMDS, as they clearly became less over-cautious and upgraded the IP-rating to something meaningful (IP53).

glassoholic wrote:Maybe a f1.4 Pro 14mm or a f1.8 Premium Prime (weather sealed this time).The 14mm (28mm equiv.) focal length is a really classic one, and only the Pana pancake 14 2.5 has covered it. I know there is a PL 15 f1.7, but for those that like to keep Oly lenses on Oly cameras, and/ or get a true 28mm equiv. FL, I think a 14 could be quite popular. Priced a bit less than the PL 15 would help too for sales.I think there are some weaknesses in your logic. The M43 system already has a very large selection of lenses, and the vendors are having trouble breaking even.Committing a design team to what is essentially a duplicate product and selling it at a low price isn’t going to help OMDS stay afloat (and isn’t going to happen).The 14/2.5 is one of pancake lenses but kind of slow, and got an undeserved bad knock for soft edges; it hasn’t been a popular lens.If OMDS were to design a faster, sharper 14mm pancake lens there would be a reason to buy. Something like a 14/2.Alternatively a 14mm Pro Series lens, eg 14mm/1.4, very sharp with good corners, that should get a lot of interest and sales.Neither of these are going to be budget lens.

As far as I can recall, when I bought a 28mm in film days, it was largely because I couldn't afford the 24mm! These days manufacturers can make zooms starting at 24mm for reasonable prices (and decant quality too). Back in the day that would have been just a dream.Similarly the 50mm standard isn't because of some inherent image advantage, but more because there were existing designs as I understand it.So, 24, 28, 35, 50, 90 (85) are all traditional fixed focal lengths, but none of those numbers should really be raised above others. Some them represent what was economic at some point in time.Mark

Interesting discussion from all sorts of views.  Since I have almost 0 interest in small or lightweight primes--heck, I do street shooting sometimes with my 50-200 (being at a distance has advantages)--if I wanted wide & fast, I would pony up for the PL 10-25 f1.7.  I rented that lens last year for a trial.  It's great at what it does and worked wonderfully well on my em1.2.  That said, I much preferred using the PL 25-50mm f1.7.  I really just don't do wide very often.  I do have a lightweight fast prime that I use for portraits:  the quite affordable Sigma 30mm f1.4.  I never have used it as a walkabout lens, however.

Mark Thornton wrote:As far as I can recall, when I bought a 28mm in film days, it was largely because I couldn't afford the 24mm! These days manufacturers can make zooms starting at 24mm for reasonable prices (and decant quality too). Back in the day that would have been just a dream.Similarly the 50mm standard isn't because of some inherent image advantage, but more because there were existing designs as I understand it.Wrong. It is equivalent to the diameter of the projected image circle for a 36mm x 24mm film frame. It is a cheap optical formula to make for any lens.So, 24, 28, 35, 50, 90 (85) are all traditional fixed focal lengths, but none of those numbers should really be raised above others.False again.Some them represent what was economic at some point in time.MarkTedolph

tedolf wrote:Mark Thornton wrote:Similarly the 50mm standard isn't because of some inherent image advantage, but more because there were existing designs as I understand it.Wrong. It is equivalent to the diameter of the projected image circle for a 36mm x 24mm film frame. It is a cheap optical formula to make for any lens.That would be 43.2mm, quite a bit different from 50. Some "normal" lenses were also 55 or 58mm nominally or in actual focal length.Ralph

ausserirdischesindgesund wrote:tedolf wrote:Mark Thornton wrote:Similarly the 50mm standard isn't because of some inherent image advantage, but more because there were existing designs as I understand it.Wrong. It is equivalent to the diameter of the projected image circle for a 36mm x 24mm film frame. It is a cheap optical formula to make for any lens.That would be 43.2mm, quite a bit different from 50. Some "normal" lenses were also 55 or 58mm nominally or in actual focal length.Wrong again. The projected image circle is always larger than the diagonal of the image. Otherwise you would get very severe vignetting.Ralph, if I were you I would quit now.Nevertheless, I am impressed that you have mastered the Pythagorean theorem.RalphTedolph

Mark Thornton wrote:As far as I can recall, when I bought a 28mm in film days, it was largely because I couldn't afford the 24mm! These days manufacturers can make zooms starting at 24mm for reasonable prices (and decant quality too). Back in the day that would have been just a dream.Similarly the 50mm standard isn't because of some inherent image advantage, but more because there were existing designs as I understand it.So, 24, 28, 35, 50, 90 (85) are all traditional fixed focal lengths, but none of those numbers should really be raised above others. Some them represent what was economic at some point in time.Mark"Classic" is a subjective vaporous term that carries little weight. Some might consider Captain and Tennille "classic rock" but I don't.

Henry Stamm wrote:Interesting discussion from all sorts of views. Since I have almost 0 interest in small or lightweight primes--heck, I do street shooting sometimes with my 50-200 (being at a distance has advantages)--if I wanted wide & fast, I would pony up for the PL 10-25 f1.7. I rented that lens last year for a trial. It's great at what it does and worked wonderfully well on my em1.2. That said, I much preferred using the PL 25-50mm f1.7. I really just don't do wide very often. I do have a lightweight fast prime that I use for portraits: the quite affordable Sigma 30mm f1.4. I never have used it as a walkabout lens, however.Oh the joy of mounting a small prime and pocketing another for a day! Oh, let me bring a spare battery, and a small tripod just in case. Guess I need a backpack. Oh, the 12-40s already packed, may as well keep it there... and the 75 can't hurt.Oh the joy of mounting a small prime and pocketing another for a day!

if you need a semi wide prime then 20mm 1.7 is for you.you said you have other lenses that cover near or exactly 14mm so you not need itI shoot lots of concerts, and I get it that the f2.5 is not as bright as a f2.

Well, OMDS did already do a 20mm f1.4 (semi wide angle) which many would find good for street work.Yup but this is mainly because it's also such a usefull FL for adventurers. That lens is quite portable, WR and at 1.4 aperture it's quite fast. That's why they released it.There is no more interest in street photography anymore for m43. So no Pen F II. It's nice we have quadrillion of lenses but the last small, light and not downgraded cameras were Panas GX8 + Oly Pen F. Sadly I think they were last we saw for m43. Thus my transition to Fujifilm.Cheers

Dunsun wrote:There is no more interest in street photography anymore for m43. So no Pen F II. It's nice we have quadrillion of lenses but the last small, light and not downgraded cameras were Panas GX8 + Oly Pen F. Sadly I think they were last we saw for m43.As you can see in every format there is little interest for RF bodies. Fuji also confirmed that without X-T line they would stop the digital imaging business because sales were so low. Only Sony pushes RF bodies in APSC line but this is mainly they want you to upgrade to FF line. Yes, they have the A7C but this is a parts bin product. Also Pen F was just a JPEG camera with large sensor. And terrible CDAF. If they really release a high-end Pen it wil feature an OM-5 HW. Better than GX9 or even older GX8.

Cornflake7 wrote:Dunsun wrote:There is no more interest in street photography anymore for m43. So no Pen F II. It's nice we have quadrillion of lenses but the last small, light and not downgraded cameras were Panas GX8 + Oly Pen F. Sadly I think they were last we saw for m43.As you can see in every format there is little interest for RF bodies. Fuji also confirmed that without X-T line they would stop the digital imaging business because sales were so low. Only Sony pushes RF bodies in APSC line but this is mainly they want you to upgrade to FF line. Yes, they have the A7C but this is a parts bin product. Also Pen F was just a JPEG camera with large sensor. And terrible CDAF. If they really release a high-end Pen it wil feature an OM-5 HW. Better than GX9 or even older GX8.OMDS has geared itself to concentrate on the premium OM1 system this is evident in their new lens releases as well as their advertising.A imitation rangefinder does not fit in with their PR, they are adventure company with light weight products weather sealed and ready for the backpack and dehydrated food. Though it also caters for the BIF photographers with their all terrain vehicles and plug in coffee makers.The urban photo junkies need not apply after all they have used film cameras available to them.The Pen F is pretty useless for street photography unless one uses it manually, auto focusing in dim light is just too slow. It does look the part but I doubt if it is on any dentist's bucket list.