(FT5) The Kit lens! M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 ED.

Simon says:

Why not a 12-28mm f2.8-3,5? The popularity of the Pana LX-3 showed that consumers wish to have fast lenses, even if it has a limited reach. Or what about a decent 14-120 zoom? Nobody really needs yet ANOTHER slow kit lens with a boring standard zoom range. Another point is when I buy a small camera like that I don’t want to lug around tons of additional accessories (viewfinder, flash) and lenses.

pebachter says:

f5.6 on the “long” end. Not really something to spend much money for.

Ranger 9 says:

Yawn, another Micro Four Thirds “pinhole” lens.

Yes, Chris, f/3.5 is better than f/4 — but not by much! Even the rumored 17mm f/2.8 ‘pancake’ lens doesn’t do much for the indoor/low-light photographer.

When is some lens maker going to have the guts to step outside everyone else’s footprints and bring out some lenses with more aggressive specs? Adapters for “big” Four Thirds, M-mount, and C-mount lenses do help fill the gap a bit, but none of them really let us cash in on all the advantages Micro Four Thirds is supposed to have.

pasha says:

it would be much bigger if it were say 2.8-3.5.
there is 14-35 f2 lens, which cost 2k$:))

zuiko says:

well, the original pen lenses are adaptable as well, so there will be nice compact 80mm f1.4, 85mm f1.2 and 120mm f1.5 equivalent lenses. But we’ll just have to a bit more patient! the camera isn’t there yet, and there will be more to come. At least some f2 lenses I suppose. First very compact, then a bit larger. They learned the hard way with the 4/3 system, where they started out large and went small afterwards! Designing a good compact fast lens has never been easy!

tk says:

original reports said kit would come with two lens so I assume the pancake and this one.

good review from dpreview for this lens

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_14-42_3p5-5p6_o20/

chris says:

do you mean that they will deliever both (!) lenses together with the body…

or do you mean there will be 2 different combinations: zoom + body and prime + body as a combination?

Bu says:

The very notion of kit lenses needs to be redefined. So much time and effort into developing this product, but so little attention to detail by offering at least one fast lens f1.4 or better. Appreciate the need for small, but certain product development decisions really do conflict with the wisdom behind the product’s ability.

tk says:

@bash

understand its not the same, but I bet it is pretty darn close.

@ chris

from a previous post see note 7. percentages state accuracy of prediction.

1) 12MP sensor (effective megapixel) 99%
2) BodyIS 99%!
3) 3.0 LCD and no swivel 85%
4) New liveview which works very well with the BodyIS 99%
5) ISO 200-3200 50% . Other option is 100-3200 50%. May this will depends from the final firmware.
6) Two colours – Silver (with black parts) and White/beige 99%
7) 17mm 2.8 and 14-42mm lens 99%
8 ) The 17mm will come in two colors (silver and black?) 60%
9) One more lens to come? Maybe a second zoom? 35%
10) Same autofocus as the Panasonic G1 50%
11) Video 720p ( Video Record can use 6 ART Fliters, and there is audio recording) 99%
12) Size 120×70×35mm 70%
13) SD/SDHC cards
14) The E-P1 can control an external flash (the FL-XXR)
15) 990$ body+kit lens 70%
16) New converter 43->M43 (with autofocus with normal 43?) 90%
17) external flash FL-xxR ? 75%
UPDATE:
18) 17mm external viewfinder 70%

tk says:

sorry, that should say @bish not bash:)

morgan says:

I’m much more a prime lens guy, but I have to say, when I shoot my canon 30D with the 17-55 2.8 IS, it’s pretty awesome. But I use my R-D1 and film rangefinders way more, and just love primes. What I’d really love is fast EFL 28, 50, 85 – 1.4 or faster and call it a day.

JD says:

*Kit Lenses – Normally Slow*
I have no problem with Olympus starting with a “standard” kits lens. As <Rob-L said, its seems Canon/Nikon/Pansonic (except for GH-1) all bundle fairly slow lenses with their “kits”. It makes some sense that you want to put out a price-competitive product, and fast glass seems to cost a lot. Take the 35-100mm F2 Olympus four thirds lens, it’s lovely but it cost me more than any camera I have ever purchased.

*LX3 as Comparison*
Simon brings up a good point about the LX3 having fast glass and being very popular. However, and somebody correct me if I’m wrong, with the larger sensor of the E-P1, a 24mm-60mm (35mm equiv) F2 lens like the LX3 has would be pretty large and hefty, probably not the image Olympus wants to promote for their flagship small and light camera.

*four thirds for fast glass*
Also, if the rumors of full autofocus for all four thirds lenses (with adapter) are true, then Olympus may feel that for now if somebody wants a 24-120mm (35mm equiv) lens they should get the 12-60mm four thirds, or another faster option is the 14-35mm F2 four thirds. I am crossing my fingers on this one b/c I would love to use all my old glass with full autofocus on the m43 system, as my Pany G1 cannot .

*economy*
With the current global economy I can’t fault Olympus if they had the choice of offering a $700-$1000 “kit” versus a $1400-$1800 “kit” [I don’t know what the actual price will be, that is simply my guess). Hopefully this camera will appeal to camera buyers of all levels, i.e. beginners seeking a compact high quality solution and “pros” seeking a small take-everywhere companion to a larger DSLR. Since micro four thirds has the widest legacy lens compatibility that I know of, I am not worried if it takes Olympus a while to put out some new fast glass for the system.

*I feel your pain*
Sure, I feel like a lot of you guys that want to see some amazingly fast glass at a low price, but lets give Olympus some time to announce their system and develop their lens roadmap before we call the system dead .

*
response*
Thoughts???

Godot says:

If Olympus hopes to snag some Panasonic G1/GH1 users looking for a second body, they’d better offer a body-only kit.

The size reduction is nice to have, but a second slow zoom with almost the exact same range as the G1 kit lens will not be welcome to me. The 17/2.8 is somewhat more interesting, but something I’d rather have the option of buying on its own (after waiting for the price on the Panasonic 20/1.7, a much more desirable lens in theory, but who knows how much more expensive).

Jón says:

Well, it seems that Olympus is aiming for compactness at all cost. The 14-42 is 2cm shorter than the Panasonic 14-45, which is about 6cm… Not bad…

wimdows says:

If you are coming from an SLR 3.5-5.6 seems decent enough. If you are spoiled by some great fast compact lenses (as are to be found on the Digilux 1, the C8080, and the GX100) 3.5-5.6 is quite a big step-down.
Ah well, there is always the higher ISO’s, I guess. No such thing on the older compacts.

Chris says:

If the kit lens is good enough there is not much desire to upgrade. BTW, do realise that 4/3 with F3.5 is still nearly a stop more light than 1/1.6″ with F2.

That said, I think that wide and fast is the real area of advantage for µ4/3, so I expect that these will appear. I expect a string of primes will be announced, some of which will be very fast.

Something like a 10-30 F2.8 and a 25-100 F2.8 might suit µ4/3 as faster zoom lenses. But.. these two lenses don’t suit this particular camera and the statement Olympus is trying to make.

cherrytree says:

Some very funny comments on this article. People clearly don’t understand how big the lenses would have to be to make the lens faster and keep quality.

Chris says:

The 10-30 and 25-100 mentioned above would be reasonable size lenses, but not prohibitive. It’s just that they would be big enough that they don’t really match the E-P1, especially not for launch when Oly are trying to make a point about how small the camera is.

Agent00soul says:

Yes, as much as I want a faster zoom, I think it’s a wise move to go for a maximally compact zoom first. I just hope a higher spec normal zoom will not be too far away.