New answers tagged pricing
The Canon 50/1.8 II is a pricing anomaly. A better comparison might be the EF 45/2.8 STM pancake lens ($200), and the Olympus 17mm f/2.8 pancake lens ($250). And if you really think about it, a normal fast lens on Canon APS-C would be a 35/2, which, if you get the non-IS version is about $550, new. The EF 35/1.4L is about $1500. And the Panasonic Leica ...
Camera and lens designs are full of compromises and certain decisions have knock on effect throughout the system. Olympus decided on a particularly thick filter stack when specifying the micro four thirds system. This and the short backfocus distance of a mirrorless lens mount necessitate a telecentric or near telecentric lens design where rays exit the ...
The basic answer is that Canon's 50mm f/1.8 is an exception even within Canon's lineup. It's an old, simple design with nothing fancy, and made to be mass-produced cheaply. Compare the Canon 85mm f/1.8, at AU$360. Basically, almost no lenses are as cheap as the one you're using as your reference point, so your perception is skewed. The Olympus lenses aren't ...
Part of the reason is probably that Canon and m4/3 have different flange focal distances, which has a big effect on what focal lengths can be done with simple and cheap lens designs. For the flange focal distances found in typical SLR systems, 50mm is a sweet spot in that regard. For the much shorter distance of the m4/3 system, this is not the case.
Top 50 recent answers are included