Sorry if i ask , why are you no longer Olympus shooter?

@@mauroangelantoni6889 hey Mauro! I needed better ISO performance for weddings and sports. If i didn’t shoot professionally I would still use Olympus. In fact I’ve thought about creating a kit just for my personal use.

@@PhotoBob Hey Bob , thanks for the answer. I am a Canon shooter for many year, I shoot a lot of real estate. I was thinking to create a small kit , much lighter and a lighter tripod , but still always maintaining quality. What do you think ?

@@mauroangelantoni6889 I actually shoot some real estate as well. I don’t do a lot of it but I do shoot it for several agents. I found the m43 to work fine for real estate. You don’t have as much flexibility in dynamic range but I typically did window pulls so the dynamic range wasn’t much of an issue for me. The 7-14 2.8 and 12-40 2.8 were both good lenses. However there is a new 8-25 f4 that might be perfect. There isn’t a tilt shift option but I didn’t use one anyway. The IBIS is so great on Olympus cameras I could shoot interiors without a tripod sometimes. I still needed them for darker interiors of course. Overall I think it’s a good platform for real estate.

@@PhotoBob Thank you Bob !

My thoughts exactly. I'm thinking of selling my 25/1.8 and just replace it with this one.

@@JezdziecBezNicka It depends. For me 20/1.7 and 45/f1.8 are both great lens for social events and playing with depth of field a bit. 45mm is good for kids (and similarly sized animals :) ). Zoom lenses for almost everything else. Now question is if it is more versatile than 12-60 kit lens which is awesome imho.

Or the 40-150mm f/2.8 for a really versatile combo.

@@Ildskalli I have the 40-150mm and this sounds perfect to pair with it to do street photography, instead of me carrying my 25 and 17 primes.

I am thinking about this plus the 40-150 and the teleconverters. What else whould I need?

When I look at the E-P7, I just wonder, "Who asked for this camera?" If they had brought back the accessory port, then it would be an entirely different conversation. But they didn't.

Sorry - I love Olympus but recall the death of the OM system - they have 'form'. As for the new lens this was in long term development way before real Olympus ditched, the new 'mini Pen F is a stripped down version - but still expensive. Nothing to save the format here folks... sorry.

@@danieldougan269 The PEN series is one of their most popular lines in terms of sales. Especially in some specific countries. It’s a great camera focused on portability.

@@jamespeirce2582 @Daniel Dougan - Olympus PEN series is highly respected among Japanese women who want a simple-to-use camera to slip into their purse and pull out to take "real photos", in place of a phone--it's almost cultural. I am sure this was JIP's target market to boot immediate sales revenues.

I have the same "holy trinity" as you - I also love the 7-14, but find that I have a distortion problem unless I shoot an object straight on. When I use any kind of angle, I get distortion - how do you handle this in post processing?

i feel the same way... i sold my first olympus camera, but lens like these make me want to switch back lol... fuji really needs to make more lens with the manual clutch!!

@@mujosews I really like the quirkiness of M43, and their research and development into their lenses and bodies is no joke. But I wish they at least tried to enter the APSC market with the same level of design and engineering

@@alihall4208 i would jump ship fast hahaha. so many features jammed into their camera. i really miss live comp from olympus cameras

I've had the 7-14 on my wishlist for a while and this seems lighter, (much) cheaper, smaller and great for videography. Sold

Take a look at Chris Walker's video. The 7-14 and 8-25 lenses are almost the same size and this on is only about 100g lighter. I was expecting this to be smaller and lighter at f4.

Simon! :D

@@evanmcknight2566 14 vs 25 at the long end is a huge difference, 28 vs 50 in FF equivalent FL

​@@problemat1que I realize this is a significant change in field of view, but I'm still surprised at the size when it's extended. I was expecting something in between the size and weight of the Olympus 12-45 f4 and 12-40 f2.8. Even collapsed this looks bigger than the 12-40 2.8 and it weighs more than the 12-40 2.8. I'm curious to see it extended fully with the hood on next to the Olympus 12-100 f4 since people say that lens is getting on the big side. I know 14 is a long way from 25 in terms of field of view, but the Panasonic 8-18 f2.8-4 goes to a FF36 equivalent so wide normal, doesn't extend, takes smaller 67mm filters, is about 100 g lighter and has a faster aperture at the wide end than this lens. Maybe I'm expecting way too much, but I was expecting the 8-25 to be more like the Panasonic in terms of size and weight. That being said I can appreciate that Olympus wanted to make something different than Panasonic. I just didn't realize it would be this size when extended.

Good point! The Panasonic is a good comparison. Excited to see how the Olympus video traits stand out.

There is also an Olympus 9-18 that is even smaller.

@@lemmontree1 it is darker though, and lower quality. Not comparable in my opinion.

Exactly, it just strikes me why they came with it so late.

My Em1.1 12-100/8-18 works perfectly fine for me.

If it's so easy to give up then you should just switch. No force in the universe is judging you. Just use whatever system works for you.

It's a 16-50mm f/8 equivalent lens. How is this interesting to anyone, especially when it's so inanely overpriced?

@@youknowwho9247 I mean for my multi-day trekking trips where being versatile, small and light is super important, tried a 8-day trek in Patagonia with a full-frame Nikon kit of 17-35mm was so painful. For landscape photography I really don't need super-fast aperture

I agree. I love mine!

I have the older Olympus 9-18mm f4-5.6 which has a filter thread. Love it for landscape, haven't used it for video, videographers will like the constant f4 on the new 8-25mm when zooming.

I was just going to say the same thing. If you're outdoor and landscape where this lens shines you really want those filter threads but everybody makes their wide angle zoom with no options other than weird massive clip-on solutions.

There are already other options to cover that. But this lens sure covers an excellent focal range in an attractive package to solve that problem.

The primes are noticeably smaller as well.

People make the mistake and always compare numbers or equivalents. Sure, you can say, that a Sony FE 50mm 1.8 is smaller and lighter than a m.Zuiko 25mm 1.2 (which should be an equivalent 50mm 2.4). But there are a lot of characteristics, which might be more important than that: - lens sharpness wide open - look/ technical quality of the picture, Bokeh quality - performance against bright sunlight (purple fringing, CAs, contrast, lens flare, sunny stars) - nearest distance to the subject (always very good at Olympus) - focus clutch with easy indicator for infinity - FN custom button - Focus speed - Focus speed at dim situations or very low light - weather sealing - quality of the lens /feeling Keep in mind, with this lens, you can go outside at midnight and shoot handhold at 1.2 for 2-3 seconds (when using Olympus EM1/5) and the camera will focus even -6 AF steps.

Agreed since that lens has a reasonably similar zoom range and is lighter and faster at the wide end. I was really expecting this lens to come in under the size and weight of the Panasonic even with the extended zoom range. Maybe too much to ask for. Maybe being optimized for video adds to all that. To me these two lenses are natural competitors.

I can't really say why, but I do to!😄 I actually hope that the other team on DP revieiw does the video on that one. They make a different type of content that I think would fit the EP7 better.

@@freddie8812 I just saw some previews and reviews of the E-P7, I'm more surprised to hear everyone making similar statements that I was thinking about.

I’d love this to be true, but I’m afraid it isn’t (at least by the normal definition of the terms you are using). The light gathering power of a camera is determined by the area of its (equivalent) entrance aperture - in simple terms the size of the hole on the front. The entrance aperture of a F4 m43 lens is roughly the same as a F8 full frame lens, and the light gathering power is therefore similar. The good news - which is probably the fundamental of what you are saying - is that for a fixed depth of field a m43 camera will be operating at 2 stops wider F-stop than a full frame camera. The light gathering power of the two cameras will be essentially the same in such a fixed depth of field comparison. The low light noise performance will also usually be very similar (because the total light power incident on the sensor is the same, and the m43 camera will be operating at 2 stops lower ISO).

@@Stephen.Bingham You're right. I was defining the light gathering capabilities in terms of light intensity per square mm, not in terms of total light collected by the sensor. Total light collected is more relevant for low light photography.

@@stevebonn3463 A useful “thought experiment” to clarify these issues is to take a m43 lens and put a “perfect” 2x teleconverter on the back. This will expand the image dimensions by two, and the area by four, making it suitable - in principle - for covering a full frame sensor. The light gathered, image depth of field, and field of view don’t change. The focal length doubles and the lens becomes two f-stops slower.

I completely agree, even for the maximum focus length of 100 mm it can do very nice close-ups.

you are a very strong backpacker: I would not look at anything bigger than Laowa 7.5/9/10 for my multi-day canoe trips.

Where did you hear about the panasonic lens? They already have the 8-18 so it would be weird to release another one similar?

They did it! We will see it late this year!

coming soon!

New flagship camera development already announced for late 2021. Should see it around a similar time to the GH6.

OM Digital Solutions takes their name directly from the OM film SLRs which were popular and innovative for their time. OM specifically refers to Olympus Maitani. Yoshihisa Maitani was the man who designed the OM cameras, and was responsible for bringing philosophies like "the lens is the soul of the camera" and "the best camera in the world is the one you have with you" into the company. The Pen-F and the OM1 and its successors were very popular and sold well. Olympus has kept Maitani philosophy at its core, including through the development of Four Thirds, the compact DSLR camera system that brought us new technologies like Live View, In-Body Image Stabilisation and the fully articulated LCD screen. Those philosophies carried on into Micro Four Thirds, with Micro referring to how much smaller cameras could be without a mirror box, though it did take a while before the OM-D line of cameras did come out and I guess that's where we are now. Personally, I really like the OM name, both as a reference directly to Maitani as well as to the legendary camera system.

@@vaska00762 Thanks, I know the story yet the olympus brand is much more known, OM being more a model name than anything else. Also olympus is known and appreciated for scientific optics... So I think it is better for them to keep this branding....

It is pretty good news. I'm still worried though. Lens engineering usually takes several years, and it could be this lens was already designed before the handover? I'm not sure, correct me if I'm wrong. Regardless, it's a lens with very usable focal length. Great design.

@@professionalpotato4764 At least JiP still use the brand name. The development should be started quite long ago, as it is a lens to fill some focal range.

Technically, Leica Camera doesn't own the Leica brand, either - As I recall, it's that ColorChecker company which actually owns the Leica brand. Can't get too hung up on the details, just judge the products on merit.

All the signs so far is that the energetic and visionary young engineering talent went to the new company, while the deadwood corporate types stayed with the old company. The biggest millstone around the neck of Olympus Imaging was Olympus Corp. Now they are free to get back to their Maitani roots. Not all takeovers are bad. The Minolta takeover by Sony has been an obvious success. And never forget that Leica went broke in the 1980’s, and it is only after Blackstone took over that they were able to engineer a comeback as a very successful niche manufacturer. And there is the takeover of Mamiya by Phase One in the medium format world that worked out well.

I bring a 1.5 lbs backpacker tripod with me while backpack camping/hiking. m43 camera+lens packages are light enough to be stable on it, and the Ibis also helps to keep long exposures super sharp.

OMDS management is literally just Olympus management before the sale. All the people in the decision making processes are former Olympus employees and now, they're not attached to a medical instruments company, they're free to make their own decisions and execute them without some surgeon who's more concerned about decisions about some laparoscopic equipment getting R&D.

@@vaska00762 To be fair Olympus medical is the bread winner for their revenue streams and the consumer market sales was in the constant red for several years now.

@@subliminallyinc the revenue disparities apparently created a situation where Olympus board members slowly turned into one dominated by the medical division, and more and more included doctors, surgeons and biomedical researchers. In Japan is typical to have professionals who use the product a company makes in the decision making process. It's why you find professional photographers in the ranks of Canon and Nikon, and now OMDS. According to the OMDS presentation at CP+ 2021, the camera division actively requested being sold off for the corporate freedom which would occur from not needing to get people who work with medical and scientific equipment to approve the development of a certain lens, camera or other technology. It's not unusual for the current brands in imaging to lose money with cameras. Canon take in most of their money from printers and scanners. Nikon make most of their money out of semiconductor lithography systems as well as opthalmic products and microscopes. Fujifilm make loads of money from x-ray machines and x-ray film. Leica make huge amounts of money from land surveying equipment, and even make everything from gun scopes to microscopes. And I don't really need to explain where Sony and Panasonic make their money. No camera company really makes any money from cameras anymore, not even the big names. It's their side gig that's the money maker, and I guess the Olympus camera division probably felt like the side gig was becoming so dominant, they couldn't get their ideas heard.

The Pana-Leica 8-18mm f2.8-4 is the 'pro version of the 9-18 f4-5.6'

@@pizzasaurolophus yes, I totally agree. 1mm wider, a stop faster on either end, weather sealed, no extending and metal build, I think 100 g heavier. It is indeed the pro-version of the 9-18 f4-5.6. I guess Olympus wanted to do something a bit different. My expectations seem to be unrealistic for a lens with a greater zoom range or perhaps the Panasonic is the lens I should really be looking at.

No, it's a fake 0.42x magnification already taking the crop into account (in reality it's only 0.21x). And with high resolution sensors, like that on the A7RM4, it's possible to easily frame shots just as close or more by cropping. There's really no advantage there.

@@Ildskalli Thanks for the information. Cropping after the fact is no argument. I can easily shoot a terrapixel panorama with a 2MP camera and crop a 1:1 macro shot out of it if the subject is static. If it's not static then MFT cameras easily outperform every single modern Sony camera including the A7R4 or A1 in the macro area. That's easy because Sony cameras misses even the most basic features like focus bracketing among a gazillion other things that all other cameras can do for years now. Even a $9000 camera like the A1 can't do a 60s exposure without help from external hardware.

@@matt_phistopheles I dunno what the heck you're talking about. A larger image, made from a larger sensor with more pixels can be cropped down to match that of a smaller sensor without penalty. It's a pretty good argument - I own a Nikon Z7 and multiple Olympus bodies, and the quality of the Z7's 20 MP APS-C crops is still measurably better than that of any MFT sensor, in no small part thanks to the ISO 64 setting. Oh, and the Z7 has focus stacking.

@@Ildskalli and how is carrying the Z lenses around your neck all day, vs the m4/3?

@@joeltunnah 1. I use a wrist strap, neck straps are awful, period. 2. The weight of my Z7 kit isn’t much heavier than the comparable G9 kit I used (less than 100gr difference), but the IQ is vastly better. 3. If you aren’t using the smallest possible bodies and lenses, the so-called “MFT advantage” evaporates really quickly.

Look up the Olympus Lens Roadmap. This 8-25mm is one of the many lenses that have been teased and is now out. Next lens could be a 100mm macro. But there are other zooms in the roadmap and there's also super bright primes, which are understood to be f/1.0

@@vaska00762 Why are they making f/1.0 primes though? The f/1.2 primes are already waaaaaaay too costly, I can only imagine each f/1.0 prime is probably around $2.2k each. There's no point in fighting full frame, they should really focus on the strengths of m43 and not fight a losing battle.

@@professionalpotato4764 I... don't really get it, personally. It's theoretically possible that the f/1.0 lenses get cancelled... but I understand the rumours suggest that Olympus/OMDS are struggling to make these lenses light enough and have acceptable AF performance.

@@vaska00762 I hope they do get cancelled. The f/1.2 primes already don't make much sense when FF gives better images for less weight and money. I would like to see them make something idk, street photography oriented? Like a weather sealed m43 with compact weather sealed primes too. A lot of the f/1.8 primes now aren't weather sealed :(

There'a already a 12-100/F4 pro with Sync IS and it's an amazing lens. Many have taken handheld shots up to 8 seconds

Totally agree. I would have been happier if this was an update of the 9-18 f4-5.6 with weather sealing and metal construction. I guess I was under the impression that it would be smaller and lighter. I've been spoiled by the 12-40 f2.8. I'm not totally sure about were Olympus is going with their two new f4 zooms.

You'll find that a lot of pros are turning to M43 cameras, particularly those who are wildlife, action and sports photographers.

@@TL-xw6fh the whole reason Olympus’ business model collapsed was because they lost the “pro” market to Sony when that company started coming out with full frame bodies that were pretty much the same size as the E-M1 line and much smaller than the E-M1X. And while full frame lenses are much bigger than M43 lenses, more pros are willing to put up with the added weight and size for the benefits full frame provides and those who don’t still have the option of using lighter APS-C lenses with their full frame cameras in “crop mode.” OM-D will be much better off focusing their meager resources in marketing towards the well heeled amateurs that are looking for high end features in small bodies. They need to figure out why they are one of the best selling cameras in Japan yet sorely lagging in sales in the global market. Tap into that magic and market it globally. Despite being a happy owner of 2 E-M1s and an E-M1ii, I think it’s time for Oly to focus more on the PEN line of cameras and the smaller E-M10 cameras (as in smaller than the E-M1 and E-M5).

@@evanmcknight2566 I think the F4 Zooms coupled with a fast prime like the Pany 25mm F1.4...makes perfect sense. I could even mount this on M10 Mk 1 with the body grip. This gonna be perfect for hiking/landscaping. the 12-42mm f2.8 Pro will just be a backup lens...

I agree entirely.