Rumor of new lenses for AGAF100

Yak

Yak

Well-known member
For what it is worth I thought people might be interested that the site 4/3 Rumors is reporting "Two new MicroFourThirds zoom lenses to be announced along the new Panasonic AG-AF100?"

http://www.43rumors.com/index.php/2...e-announced-along-the-new-panasonic-ag-af100/

from the article
"One of our readers that works for a big online-store told us that he has been trained to use the new Panasonic AG-AF100. He don’t know when exactly the new camera will be launched (but he is sure it will be soon). He also saw at least two new Panasonic MicroFourThirds zooms that are optimized for video (silent autofocus and smooth manual zoom and focusing)."
 
Last edited:
I have to wonder about the credibility of the reader who "works for a big online store" who has been training with the AF-100.

It just sounds questionable.
 
I think it makes business sense for Panasonic to introduce new lenses with the AF100. After all, why cede that market to other vendors? They've only got 1 "video" lens now for micro 4/3 - the 14-140 - and that's not all that hot. If the new lenses have auto and manual focus and iris, then Panasonic would have advantages overs competitors. Wider aperture would be nice, too.

We'll find out soon enough.
 
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but shouldn't it me considerably easier to build a fast (f/1.8 or thereabouts) zoom for micro 4/3 than it is for full frame cameras.

I love the kit lens when I've got plenty of light but could real use a faster zoom
 
Yes, it's easier to build a fast zoom for micro 4/3 but it would still be expensive. For a $1k camera like the GH1, people may not want to pay more for a lens. But for a $6k AF100, they might. It's all a balance between aperture, zoom range, size, and price. Pick 2.
 
What is the projected sensitivity of the camera? If it's 320iso range, I'd say a T/1.4 or T/1.8 lens would be good to produce for those in the markets of no budget/ small unit lighting. If the iso is closer to 500, 800, or 1000 iso, I'd say a T/2 or T/2.8. I don't know what the camera will be, but if it's 4/3" and only 1080... I find it difficult to swallow, in this modern era of cameras, that the ISO wouldn't be through the roof, near 800+. Seems to me fitting 1080p worth of pixels onto a 4/3" chip camera should give ample room for large photosites which should produce nice sensitivity and low noise.

Thus, you might want to hope for nice quality lenses at a slower maximum aperture... because you'll get a cheaper and smaller good quality lens. Making great lenses for T/1.4 aperture gets very pricey.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Thus, you might want to hope for nice quality lenses at a slower maximum aperture... because you'll get a cheaper and smaller good quality lens. Making great lenses for T/1.4 aperture gets very pricey.
Click to expand...
The problem is that at, say, f/5.6, the DOF will be about as shallow as that of a 2/3-inch sensor camera (e.g., Scarlet) at f/2.8, given the same field of view and subject distance.
 
Tzedekh said:
The problem is that at, say, f/5.6, the DOF will be about as shallow as that of a 2/3-inch sensor camera (e.g., Scarlet) at f/2.8, given the same field of view and subject distance.
Click to expand...

No, no... not 5.6. I doubt you'll never see a camera lens for this market being made with a maximum aperture of F/5.6!!! That would be suicide! To many people would want to take advantage of either the larger sensor size for DoF reasons, but more importantly, the camera being only $6,000, the budgets for narrative work will probably shy on the low side... thus, a F/5.6 maximum aperture lens would be ridiculous. I'd expect a F/2.8 or F/4 at the most. Quality will not be top-cine level, but good.

Primes are great, usually faster, and cost effective... but at this point, investing in manufacturing a new set of 4/3" prime lenses wouldn't be cost effective in my opinion. There are not enough 4/3" camera models to support a professional cine-level prime lens set considering ENG, event, wedding, sports, and other types of shooting will demand zooms and outweigh the demand of a prime lens set desired by the lower number of narrative shooters. Panasonic has typically been a zoom-camera company.

I am strictly talking about VIDEO division... not photography lenses. The lenses that will be marketed for 'video' use (in regards to the 100) will be zooms. That is my prediction. There will not be a cine-style prime lens set, unless the camera takes off.

My best guess will be two zooms, a low level 18-40 range and a 30-80 range lens.
 
Last edited:
Hi guys,
does anyone knows if the Panasonic Micro 4/3 lens actually on the market are compatible with AF-100? I know AF-100 has a new 16:9 sensor and i suppose that this form factor affects compatibility with Panasonic/Olympus/Leica micro 4/3 lens for photographic sensors... am i wrong?
 
I don't work for a big online store... but I do work for AbelCineTech. The AF-100 will be available in December for under $10k. It will work with the different Micro 4/3 lenses available today. A friend at Panasonic let me know that they will get engineering samples from Japan soon, but I don't believe that anyone is receiving 'training' considering that it is not a finished camera yet.
 
Sumfun said:
Yes, it's easier to build a fast zoom for micro 4/3 but it would still be expensive. For a $1k camera like the GH1, people may not want to pay more for a lens. But for a $6k AF100, they might. It's all a balance between aperture, zoom range, size, and price. Pick 2.
Click to expand...
The price of the lens doesn't have anything to do with the format of the camera (size of the sensor), but with quality of glass. A lot of people (like myself) will never buy GH1 due to lack of lenses for this camera. That's why you can buy Canon T2i for 800 bucks and slap 2.8 lenses on it and you will not be able to tell a difference between that and 7D.
 
robertrogoz said:
The price of the lens doesn't have anything to do with the format of the camera (size of the sensor), but with quality of glass.....
Click to expand...

I would not say the size of the sensor has nothing to do with the price of a lens, I believe the cost of making a lens which can cover a larger sensor will in most cases cost more than a similar lens for a smaller sensor.
 
robertrogoz said:
A lot of people (like myself) will never buy GH1 due to lack of lenses for this camera. That's why you can buy Canon T2i for 800 bucks and slap 2.8 lenses on it and you will not be able to tell a difference between that and 7D.
Click to expand...

Lack of lenses? Are you talking of the same GH1 as I do? You can put nearly every lens ever built onto this camera :D Just get the right adapter and you are good to go. Nikon, canon, contax, etc. Even PL mount lenses.
 
Simon Höfer said:
Lack of lenses? Are you talking of the same GH1 as I do? You can put nearly every lens ever built onto this camera :D Just get the right adapter and you are good to go. Nikon, canon, contax, etc. Even PL mount lenses.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately adapters don't allow for certain and critical functions of the camera. So on the contrary that solution doesn't work for me at all. It is not as important for video, but for stills, particularly for action shots. I have to be able to use AF and change ISO, aperture and shutter speed in camera.
 
That may be the case today, but will not always be the case. An electronic adapter is not impossible, and Birger has already developed such a thing for the Red One, and the AF100 will probably sell 10x as many units as the Red One, making it a much bigger market. I certainly expect electronic adapters, and sooner rather than later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top