Previous page Next page

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Preview

May 2012 | By Richard Butler, Andy Westlake
Buy on GearShopFrom $849.00

Preview based on a pre-production M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 75mm f1.8

With the new breed of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras becoming ever-more popular, manufacturers face a development dilemma. It's not enough to simply churn out camera bodies; to convince potential buyers you have an attractive system, it's essential to provide a decent range of lenses too. But lens systems are hard to establish; concentrate your design resources on affordable lenses for enthusiasts and you risk your system not appealing to the high-end users who are likesly to buy multiple lenses. Focus instead on high-end exotica, and you risk making the step up from the kit-zoom look too daunting (and expensive) for the majority of users.

Perhaps because there are two manufacturers involved, the Micro Four Thirds lens range has balanced the needs of these two audiences well - there are a handful of sub-$400 lenses for enthusiasts, with alternatives such as the recently-announced Panasonic Lumix Vario G 12-35mm F2.8 ASPH OIS and the Leica-branded Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 for the higher-end user. Now, as a counterpart to Olympus's comparatively affordable M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 portrait lens, comes its more lofty 75mm F1.8.

The 45mm F1.8 is a lovely lens precisely because it offers great image quality while offering an attractive balance of size, price and weight. However, its mainly plastic construction makes it clear that there are trade-offs being made. By contrast, the 75mm features very solid-feeling all-metal construction and those rarely-inexpensive words 'Made in Japan' etched into the body. Sure enough the 75mm is expected to sell for more than twice the price of the 45mm.

Olympus describes the 75mm as a 'high grade portrait lens.' With its 150mm-equivalent field of view it's a little bit longer than the traditional 85-135mm range, that was classically used for portraiture on 35mm cameras. Its minimum focusing distance of 0.84m means you can get pretty close to your subject, however the long effective focal length limits how close you can sensibly work with people (because your narrow field-of-view gives quite a tight crop when working close to your subject).

The F1.8 maximum aperture provides decent control over depth of field, too, offering the ability to blur-away distracting backgrounds and focus attention on your subject. In this respect it behaves much like a 100mm F2.4 lens would on an APS-C camera, or a 150mm F3.5 lens on full frame. This makes it an attractive proposition for its primary purpose of photographing people.

The lens needn't just be used for portraiture, though. Olympus suggests it will also be useful for stage, studio and indoor sports work, and we see little reason to disagree with this. A 150mm-equivalent lens is still a useful thing to have in many circumstances, especially if it's as portable as the Olympus.

Headline features

  • 150mm-equivalent focal length
  • F1.8 maximum aperture
  • 'ZERO' optical coating to reduce internal reflection
  • MSC Movie and Stills Compatible (quiet) focus system

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 specifications

Price • US $899.99
Maximum format size Four Thirds
Focal length 75mm
35mm equivalent focal length 150mm
Angle of view 16°
Maximum aperture F1.8
Minimum aperture F22
Lens Construction • 10 elements in 9 groups
• 3 Extra-low dispersion glass elements
• 2 High Refractive Index glass elements
Number of diaphragm blades 9, rounded
Minimum focus • 0.84m / 2.76ft
Maximum magnification • 0.1x (0.2x in 35mm terms)
Minimum field size • 130 x 173mm
Focus method Internal
Filter thread • 58mm
• Does not rotate on focus
Supplied accessories* • Front and rear caps
Optional accessories • LC-61 Metal lens cap
• LH-61F Metal hood with thumb-screw fitting
• LSC-0918 Lens Case
Weight 304g (10.8 oz)
Dimensions 63.5mm diameter x 69.5mm length
(2.5 x 2.9 in)
Lens Mount Micro Four Thirds

* Supplied accessories may differ in each country or area


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2012 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
413
I own it
190
I want it
20
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 213
Wilight
By Wilight (3 weeks ago)

Wow.. August 2014 and still no review? Not even the "Lab Test Report"? What's the big deal?

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

Snapped the 3rd to 8th of these yesterday.
straight out of the camera. E-M1 + 75/1.8

No lighting control, pure candids.
I'll edit them later, but work shots are calling ...

The first is with the 60 macro, the second with the 12/2.0.

http://photohounds.smugmug.com/People/Kids/

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 29, 2013)

should postpone the review further
until Sigma release a genuine version of the lens.

0 upvotes
tjbates
By tjbates (Aug 23, 2013)

Still no review. What's going on with you guys? I know it's embarassing but even if you review 18months after it's release - at least you'd have it in your archive for readers in the future. Come on - what about it.

2 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 17, 2013)

slrgear . com reviewed it ... as have a few other sites.

Suffice it to say it is an incredible lens. I am constantly amazed at the detail is captures - even without a billion marketing pixels ...

If this focal length suits you (tight face shots and landscape details, you'll appreciate it. Like the 45 and 12 it comes in black, too now.

0 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Apr 20, 2013)

It's around a year now.... and still no review. I suppose we will never see a full review for this lens. But enough serious websites have reviewed this lens by now that we don't need Dpreview to confirm what we already know. This is a spectacular lens.

Let me quote from SLRgear.com:

"There's a lot to like about the Olympus 75mm ƒ/1.8 M.Zuiko; simply amazing results for sharpness, great resistance to chromatic aberration, very low corner shading and near-zero distortion. Add in excellent build quality and good looks, and you have a package that's sure to please any photographer. The only sticking point might be the price - at around $900, it is an expensive optic. But seeing as at the time of writing there are no other lenses that offer this focal length and fast aperture setting, and given the exceptional performance, it's not surprising that Olympus is charging the premium price."

Now DPreview can go back to doing what they love to do most.
Reviewing cell phones.

6 upvotes
Bok7h
By Bok7h (Jan 25, 2013)

8 months later... still no review !
Not very serious... :/

2 upvotes
Louis_Dobson
By Louis_Dobson (Nov 29, 2012)

Preview? This has been out months now, where's the full review?

8 upvotes
herebefore
By herebefore (Nov 29, 2012)

Where you been Lou???
I agree... they've been a little slow to review what many consider "important" products.

2 upvotes
bluerocklobster
By bluerocklobster (Nov 21, 2012)

It would be great if dp-preview could go back to actually reviewing products. It's been months since anything truly helpful has appeared. I am just as good as the next guy at guessing what "might" come.

5 upvotes
Neurad1
By Neurad1 (Jul 24, 2012)

Anyone out there actually take delivery on the m.zuiko 75 1.8 yet? Have they begun shipping any of these lenses in the US?

0 upvotes
screeminloonie19
By screeminloonie19 (Jul 22, 2012)

I have a piece of S--- sp-600uz and my operating system is windows 7 3GB memory DVD super multi DL drive intel pentium my equipment should be sufficent to run this camera...But am told to upgrade drivers did so and the camera will not turn on. Olympus wants 100.00 to fix it. I have used this a few times. But it won't turn on now. I am so mad that I invested in this and now i can't use it and it will cost me to fix it. I was going to get a better olympus camera but am soooo glad I did not. I will never buy another olympus product that is for sure. I will not pay to fix it either. It has been broken for awhile now as I just don't have time to waste on this. But would love to know what the problem with it is. It was brand new when it just one day would not turn on. Has always been keep in a very nice case so was never dropped as one olympus rep asked me.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

" It was brand new when it just one day would not turn on. " - yeah sure.
If it was one day old - you take it back to the SHOP and get a replacement

What do you NEED a computer for to turn on the camera?

Why spam this thread about one of the finest lenses on the market with this irrelevant fairy story?

Photographers have ignored your bleatings en masse and bought thousands of these lenses and OMD cameras.

We are very happy indeed.

0 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Jun 18, 2012)

I really want one but then again I also want the 20mm 1,7 & 45mm 1.8 along with pana 100-300 and olympus 9-18mm

However the price alone of these lenses makes it unrealistic for me to afford the 75mm and 100-300mm. Being Unemployed is not exactly a very profitable career, Especially since in my country photography is protected under law as a profession that you must have gone through years of studying to be allowed to work in the field.

0 upvotes
Anepo
By Anepo (Jun 18, 2012)

Also when I started learning on my own photography I was always told 50mm is a perfect portrait lens, then people started saying 85mm is the perfect portrait lens and now im reading that 100mm, 135mm & 150mm are the perfect portrait lenses.

So simple question: which one is the perfect one?
It seem's nobody knows, everyone seems to be biased.

0 upvotes
lvmikus
By lvmikus (Jun 19, 2012)

The perfect portrait lens, like all things in photography, is dependent on you and your specific needs. One man's perfect lens may not work for another.

The suggestion of portrait FL between 50mm - 135mm refers to the FF equivalent and depends entirely on how you most often shoot portraits (head shots, head and shoulders only, full body, etc.) and what size imaging sensor you are using.

If you have more room to shoot and are on a m43 body, then a 75mm FL may work best for you. While 85mm on an APS-C may be best for another. FYI, 75mm m43=150mm FF; 85mm APS-C= 136mm FF.

The bottom line is to get out there and experiment with different FLs and find what works best for YOU.

Disclosure: 50mm on APS-C or 85mm FF is my personal choice. You are reasonably close to your subject without the distortion of bodily features that you get with lower FLs.

0 upvotes
kenneth mendez
By kenneth mendez (Jun 20, 2012)

what is your country?

0 upvotes
Cal22
By Cal22 (Aug 22, 2012)

Hi Anepo,
it's a question of your distance to the person to be photographed: With wide angle you're coming too close to the face making it look disproportional, with tele lens the face becomes flattened depending on the (long) distance.
So, as to Olympus lenses the 45 mm should be best suited for your purpose. You could also use a full frame 50 mm with an adapter, but you'd better choose the original 45 mm which is small, delivers high quality and is not expensive. (Photographing full body in limited room the Panasonic 20mm could be helpful)
The Olympus 75 mm is certainly a wonderful lens but with the disadvantages and limitations of a strong tele lens as for portraits.
My advice to you as a beginner: Don't buy many lenses! Otherwise you will be carrying a heavy and hindering equipment. Your mind isn't able to get accustomed to many different viewing angles. A few lenses are better than many. And as a photographer concentrate on the one or two topics you're really interested in!

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

The zuiko 750300 is a bit slower,
but it is sharper.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jun 8, 2012)

I read the nonsense about 85mm being 'perfect' below
I always used a 100 or 135 in the 35mm days to produce quality, saleable work.

So I just had to have a play with a zoom, set to 75mm.

One metre for face shots, and about 2 metres for a waist up.

Wide open to f2,5 it looks like there will be sufficient DOF to make a saleable portrait, with nice OOF bokeh.

Those 85mm/f1,2 face shots with the disappearing ears and only one eyelash in focus? Good luck selling them to your customers - most of mine prefer NOT to look idiotic.

If bragging to me that you can have less DOF than me is important to you, or you have some real need for that wafer thin DOF so be it.

Gear should be about balance and photographically this lens focal length looks about right. Brightening up a dark image or a stopped down preview? Even Exposure compensation can be seen. Priceless!

I'll bet the E-7 will have an EVF too.

0 upvotes
Ariston
By Ariston (Jun 8, 2012)

that's why there is a word such as professional photographer who could handle such a lens.

such lens is only for people who want and need and able to use them with efficiency. you don't need to be that grumpy just because people don't share your opinion.

besides, I can make such an effect on a small sensor P&S camera and do some post-processing work that would make a photograph appear to be taken by higher end cameras, including m4/3. now does that defeat the purpose of owning a 75mm as well?

different strokes for different folks.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jun 12, 2012)

No problem with a 1.2 lens but a face portrait taken with such a lens is rarely liked by the subject.

This type of lens, wide open (or nearly so) will work well with what looks like very smooth bokeh, in spite of the negative comments posted about it by people who have never tried it and will never try it.

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Jun 3, 2012)

Is this lens good enough for dpr to use this lens on all dpr studio shooting (for the m4/3 family)? Presently dpr uses another Oly lens and an adapter. Using this lens would make the whole studio m4/3 very native.

0 upvotes
HarryWind
By HarryWind (May 31, 2012)

Lol, if you would buy the OM-D in silver, than all new lenses would fit perfectly! And even the silver one fits to black much better than this "old-teeth-yellow" of the Canon to their bodies.

1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (May 30, 2012)

Needs Sample photos NOW!

2 upvotes
Skipper494
By Skipper494 (May 29, 2012)

Why do we have to click three times to get to this stupid review? A 150mm equivalent is NOT a portrait lens anyway, 85 is quite enough, any more and you're stopping down too far to get depth of focus, into the diffraction range.

1 upvote
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 29, 2012)

Well, 85mm in FF is certainly not always enough, especially for tight crops.

Plus this lens has got DOF of a 75mm lens, not of a 150mm one (which has equal FOV on 24x36mm).

1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

what are you talking about ??

is it you ken rockwell ? hahaha

135 and 150 are PERFECT portrait lenses, 85 is a nice portrait lens, but 135 and 150 are freakin PERFECT

i cant believe what you wrote hehe better get a book or try a 150 first ;)

1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

and also, what should "any more and you're stopping down too far to get depth of focus, into the diffraction range" mean ?

i own a 135 f2 and a 150 2.8 and i have no idea why i should stop down to a point where lens diffraction comes into the game ?^^

its about PERSPECTIVE, dont you get it ? ^^

the more tele the more flattering it is, did you even tried to read a book before posting that ?

i take portraits of my girlfriend and family members with a 50mm and portraits of clients with a 135mm. because if you make a headshot with a 50 the photo is very personal, which i dont allways want for clients, the longer the lens the more it gets a portrait for a client, the wider the lens, the more its obvious that i know the person.

P E R S P E C T I V E !

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 29, 2012)

the perspective is basically the angle of view. it's very important but less so when the depth of field is very shallow.

I think the angle of view is important because that's the way we can tell if 75/1.8 is a good lens compared with 35mm format lenses near 150/3.5 (the nearest I'm aware of is Leica M-mount 135/3.4, which looks better than 75/1.8 on MTF).

and if 75/1.8 does have a better design, Canon and Nikon can also use similar design concept to make their own 150/3.5 lenses, just like all the makers now use the same basic guideline that Canon have been using for more than 20 years (Olympasu have been doing it for at least 5 some years and they can do it quite well).

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 29, 2012)

Perspective has nothing to do with FOV of a lens.

0 upvotes
StanRogers
By StanRogers (May 30, 2012)

@DarkShift - it does, and it doesn't. Perspective is a function of distance, of course, but FOV determines the framing at a given distance. A headshot taken with an 85mm (equiv) will have to be taken from a closer distance that a 135-150mm (equiv).

And we need to keep in mind that this is an IF lens; it will have a shorter focal length as you focus in. "Classic" 35mm lenses under 200mm tended to be unit focus (the lens extends as you focus closer), so this lens will be approximately equivalent to a 135mm "classic" at typical tight portrait distances.

0 upvotes
R Stacy
By R Stacy (Jun 4, 2012)

The links have become confusing as hell, agreed.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jun 16, 2012)

Tight face shots at a little over a metre from subject.
Waist-up at about 2 metres. What problem?

Gives the model a bit of space without a camera up her nose. Doesn't intimidate inexperienced amateurs either.

The 75mm should almost guaranteed high quality output and more stress-free sessions.

1 upvote
Mendocino Steve
By Mendocino Steve (May 25, 2012)

I cut my teeth back in the day with a 135mm Vivitar on various Minolta bodies. Did lots of portraits and concert work. Anybody who says that this focal length (equivalent) is not very useful.... Well, they should try it first.

2 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

They read too many brochures and take too few pictures ... Cheers!

0 upvotes
jezza__1
By jezza__1 (May 25, 2012)

People with a lot more knowledge of lens design can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is down to the lens being designed for a sensor as opposed to film, where the light needs to hit the sensor at a much straighter angle so as to minimise vignetting. I remember Leica using a sensor design with slightly offset sensels so people could still use their old lenses with minimal loss of performance.

I would also guess that this lens would perform much better wide open than an FD, but of course, we will have to wait until they have been compared in some capacity.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

> guess that this lens would perform much better wide open than an FD

if you are talking about FD135/3.5, it's unlikely anyone still has it and posts a good test on the net.

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 27, 2012)

I think people were discussing about using old FD lenses on MFT via adapter. Now f3.5 doesn't then become f1.8 or you think it does?

To my experience, the old glass generally doesn't have very good performance wide open. Stopped down they can be excellent however.

By looking at the samples I think the Zuiko/1.8 will propably have excellent performance wide open, better than FA 77/1.8. If its marvellous then the high price would be justified. Otherwise maybe not.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 27, 2012)

@DarkShift

do you know that lens design/formular has more to do with the angle of view than focal length which is really irrelevant? also lenses should normally perform best when used as it's designed.

mZD75/1.8 should by default compared to 150/3.5 because they have the same spec, of angle of view and aperture size.

mZD75/1.8 has a small aperture of only f/1.8 (about 42mm), way smaller than f/1.8 lenses for 35mm (83mm aperture) and this should be the most important factor behind any performance, and of all 4/3 lenses, that they are much easier to make.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 27, 2012)

Yes I know what you mean, but that's is not relevant to what the original poster speculated. In general lenses give their best performance at the frame center. So for some lenses (especially of not so good design) it is allright to do some cropping ;)

Your last sentence is not a general law. Apertures size for a given f-number depends on focal length. A lens with same focal length ie. 75mm/f1.8 lens has same aperture size regardless of the format.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Bernd M
By Bernd M (May 25, 2012)

I still don't understand, why this lens has to be that big. The Canon FD 85mm f1,8 was considerably smaller and had a 52mm filter thread. - and it was (is!) a very fine lens. Probably I'll try to buy one to use it with an FD adapter. Autofocus isn't really important for me. I'm already using the Canon FD 85mm f1,2 L on my 4/3 camera, but sometimes I'd like to have something a little smaller/lighter in my bag.

0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 26, 2012)

For one, it has to be 1cm longer, because the flange-back distance on µ4/3 is cm shorter. Other than that, it is a more advanced construction, with 10 lens elements rather than 6. There's a autofocus motor and an electric aperture mechanism, and control computers for those.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

@Bernd M,

not a very good lens but I use Nikon 50/1.4 think it's very handy and works fine when stopped down to f/2. got too many 50/1.4s that I mount them on each camera as body cap.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (May 28, 2012)

If you look at any manual focus lens, they are pretty much all much smaller than today's modern AF lenses. One reason is that auto focus motors and mechanisms take up more room than not having any auto focus motors and mechanisms.

And secondly, modern lens designs use more glass elements and more complex shapes to deliver better optical performance for today's demanding high-resolution sensors. For example, this Olympus 75mm f/1.8 has 10 elements in 9 groups. An old Canon FD 85mm f/1.8 had only 6 elements in 4 groups!

There is a lot less glass inside an old Canon FD 85mm f/1.8. Additionally, there's no internal AF focus components. It's no wonder the Canon FD 85mm f/1.8 is so much smaller.

2 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

two words :

1. auto
2. focus

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 29, 2012)

I hear people talking about AF again and again and this really doesn't sound smart. AF is only one factor among many and there are a lot of room in the lens to accommodate gears/screws and motors.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

That canon 85 is nowhere NEAR this Zuiko 75/1.8. NB: has the SAME filter size.

It IS cheap though ... and sort-of acceptable until F4, and becomes sharp at f5.6-f8.

Same for the 1.2, except it is acceptable at 2.8

slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/154
Chalk and cheese.
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14

Both Canon lenses are soft wide open and neither bests the zuiko - at any aperture.

It is stunning to hear people rave on about these lenses. The results simply do not match the fan-boy praise.

If I want blur, I'll use software thanks.

Shot in unbelievably dim light. A mixture of 45mm and 75mm shots
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/olympus-m-zuiko-75mm-f1-8/

0 upvotes
odl
By odl (May 25, 2012)

Gotta love Olympus. They have so much emotional currency people with all sorts of cameras must weigh in and pass judgement on each and every move they make :)

This is be a fantastic lens, sharp wide open, great colour and contrast, it is TINY, i mean look at it. I will buy it the moment one is available and it will sit in my small shoulder bag with my other body, and 6 lenses. :) I have a lot of uses for this lens both for work and for play.

For all you people claiming 150mm is not portrait... hell even 12mm can be portrait, 1000mm can be portrait. Use your imagination, leave the muslin behind and experiment :)

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Aaron MC
By Aaron MC (May 25, 2012)

To those hatin' on the lens, y'all be crazy. I'm totally happy to plunk down the cash on a lens like this. Olympus is finally giving me what I've been wanting for THREE YEARS. Good lenses FTW!

I am upset by the lack of a lens hood, though. That's pretty cheap on Olympus' part.

3 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 25, 2012)

I have to agree on this. For a 900$ lens the hood should be included and not 90$ aside.
Otherwise, I'm really happy having chosen Olympus as my gear.

4 upvotes
Narek Avetisian
By Narek Avetisian (May 25, 2012)

Michele Kappa, +1 !!!!!

1 upvote
W.C. Green
By W.C. Green (May 25, 2012)

Agree, but give me a hood and a black version and I will buy.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

I'm quite sure Oly will provide a black version later at an even higher price.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14 makes up for it?

0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 25, 2012)

Just to clear things up for some people: The focal length of a lens has no impact whatsoever regarding "flattening" of a photo or anything related to that. What makes a portrait "flat" is the distance to the subject. People equate focal length to subject distance, and that's the source of this common misconception.

So yes, 75mm on 4/3 IS THE SAME AS 150mm on a 36x24mm camera in terms of anything relating to the photographic result. Focal length in itself means nothing. Please stop saying "75mm is 75mm" like we are all morons. 75mm is not an angle of view.

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

also, some people ask why this lens has an AoV of 150mm equiv. I think this may be to compensate the smaller f/3.5 equiv. aperture.

btw, by saying 150mm equiv., we really mean a diagonal angle of 16.4 degrees (some error understoodable); and by saying f/3.5 equiv., we really mean an aperture diameter of 42mm for that 150mm equiv. lens.

we use "xxx equiv." because 35mm term is the current standard and most people comprehend that more easily.

1 upvote
Bilgy_no1
By Bilgy_no1 (May 29, 2012)

@ yabokkie

What you say on the measurements is true and very precise. However, the equivalence debate is getting a bit weird, because if you look at cameras sold the APS-C should be the standard and not Full Frame (which used to be called 'small frame' in comparison to the earlier standard formats).

What you propose would be a more precise classification of lenses, but I fear people cannot imagine what that a 16.4*/pupil-42 lens would give them in terms of image result...

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

oh yes but it has an impact, because you allways use the focal lenght together with the sensor format of the system you are talking about.

and for sure the focal lenght plays a very big role in "flattening", because the focal lenth = angle of view, because when you talk about focal lenght you allways talk about a "system" and i for example know how big an µFT sensor is.

when we talk about lenses, its allways about getting the same stuff in the picture, and about the same sensor size

so when i want to make a headshot, the picture IS flatter with a 150 compared to a 50, because we all know we are talking about a portrait lens and we want the same stuff (head) in the picture with both lenses ^^

also we all know we are talking about µFT, and we know its not 1.8 but 2.8 and so on ...

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

I for one, actually wish they'd stop talking millimeters, and start talking degrees!

Degrees tell you about the LOOK of a photo, millimeters means nothing without know the format and there are many.

Millimetres is as useless as pixel count is these days.

For my RB-67 (6x7 FULL frame), 180mm was short portrait lens, and the 250 was the head and shoulders one :)

0 upvotes
Texwiller55
By Texwiller55 (May 25, 2012)

I'm old 57 years italian photographer. I have used any analogic cameras. I remeber Hasselblad with lens "silver" like the Olympus, in this case, 75 mm. I dont' think problem when attached on "black" body Oly. No sure. Because is tres chic.
And at time the lens is more more "accattivante". I reading that one user not buy "silver" lens because his body camera, is black...too crazy excuse moi mon ami. I repeat, silver is beautiful and very nice...

10 upvotes
nico-foto
By nico-foto (May 25, 2012)

Beautiful, maybe (depending on your taste, of course, personally, i find that combination FUGLY). Unconspicuous? Definitely not.

3 upvotes
pharaviel
By pharaviel (May 25, 2012)

Always nice to find fellow italians!

1 upvote
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (May 25, 2012)

You're not going to be conspicuous with a Hassy silver lens or not. Or any camera for that matter that doesn't conform to the standard compact or mid sized SLR form factor.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

Agree, and it is MUCh less conspicuous than a brick and bazooka camera outfit.

Ask any timid person or starting-out model instead of a fan boy camera gear owner.

0 upvotes
goblin
By goblin (May 25, 2012)

DPR, will you EVER come back to tests with your lens test widget in the review ?

You had more than one lens reviewed back in 2010, not a single one reviewed in 2011.

You don't even put lens reviews inside your camera reviews, like you did before.

What happened ?

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (May 25, 2012)

We are working on re-introducing lens reviews and hope to have some news soon.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
14 upvotes
goblin
By goblin (May 25, 2012)

Thanks !

Really looking forward to that. Your widget was the best thing since sliced bread, it's really a pity we haven't seen it in action since mid 2010.

1 upvote
Entropius
By Entropius (May 25, 2012)

Please do! In particular, please test some midrange telephoto lenses. I'd like to see:

Zuiko 50-200
Canon 300/4 IS
Nikon 300/4
Pentax 300/4
Zuiko 150/2
Panasonic 100-300
Canon 400/5.6
Sigma 50-500
Sigma 120-300

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

think it's very important to design a standard process and try as much as possible to redo all the lens tests with each higher resolution body.

since you have to redo the tests anyway, any flaw in the process will be corrected before long and flawed tests may still be proved valuable.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (May 25, 2012)

The Olympus 45 1.8, with it's 7-blade aperture, has really nice bokeh, and this new lens will likely have even better bokeh with it's rounded 9-blade diaphragm.

75mm (150mm in 35mm terms), a bit longer than the classical 85-135mm portrait lens, as a focal length was likely a conscious choice by Olympus as a 67mm (the classic 135mm) may have been too close in focal length to the cheaper 45 1.8.

3 upvotes
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (May 25, 2012)

Sorry, but for me the colour of the thing is a serious point. I haven't bought any of the Oly lenses that are mentioned in this preview, because of the colour of the things. All my camera bodies are black (except a white G3 that I bought by mistake) and to me, a silver lens on a black body is not discrete enough.

Looks like Oly have lost me as a potential customer!

4 upvotes
OSAM
By OSAM (May 25, 2012)

You, sir, need help of a professional nature.

22 upvotes
ledgars
By ledgars (May 25, 2012)

If lenses is just gadgets, then lens color is most important factor.

4 upvotes
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (May 25, 2012)

Is it obvious now you are into photography more for ... Look at me, I am a photographer as opposed to .... Look at my visions done via photography....

1 upvote
nico-foto
By nico-foto (May 25, 2012)

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Calvin. I'm very into people/candid/travel photography, and silver lenses and bodies tend to jump at people much more than black ones. You don't have to be a fashionista to care about gear color, there are practical reasons why some photographers prefer black.

Remember Cartier Bresson, who used to black tape his cameras??? Would you say he's the "look at me" kind of guy?

8 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 25, 2012)

Cartier Bresson photographed many many MANY years ago. The sheer fact to HAVE a camera was a look-at-me factor.
Nowadays that's just a "1st world problem".

7 upvotes
nico-foto
By nico-foto (May 25, 2012)

Well, for one I make photographs today, and i know from personal experience that black equipment works better when you don't want people staring at your camera. YMMV as usual.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 25, 2012)

As a pro, I have to agree to a point: it's distracting to your subject at times. The look of gear IS actually important in getting candid shots. And this would be useless for street photography.

That said, if I was in the M43 system, I'd have no choice but to buy this. Even though I don't think it's performance wide open is a step up from the 45. (at least based on the samples I've seen. Lots of CA of both--maybe even more than my 85/1.8, which is quite CA-tastic). Usable with a bit of post, and just a must have for isolation with the M43 system.

Really, I'd like to see an 85/1.0 in the M43 system. That would really quash some nay sayers on the subject of subject isolation.

0 upvotes
dave gaines
By dave gaines (May 25, 2012)

Get some black paint. This lens will be worth the trouble. Or get a silver body. Practically speaking, silver stays cooler in the sun, reducing thermal effects on the glass elements, inner workings, etc. And you can find it in a dark closet too!

3 upvotes
chopsteeks
By chopsteeks (May 25, 2012)

Been shooting with titanium Contax G bodies and lenses for a good while now.....never had issues with using this combo with candid shots.....

1 upvote
ebosch
By ebosch (May 25, 2012)

IMO, the narrow AoV on this lens will require a greater working distance between you and your subject than your average street photo lenses, which is why your subject will not (probably) notice you taking candid shots even with a silver lens.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 25, 2012)

OH, sorry about my earlier comment--I thought I had seen sample pics from this lens, but what I had seen were just more 45mm samples. Lets hope this exceeds the quality of those! I'm not sure why the 45 is so mediocre. The 12 is just phenomenal!

0 upvotes
W.C. Green
By W.C. Green (May 25, 2012)

The silver wouldn't bother me on a silver body, but I hate the black grip on the silver. Make a silver grip or a black lens. Sorry, but I want visual consistency.

0 upvotes
ebosch
By ebosch (May 26, 2012)

I don't think a silver grip would look good, they definitely should go for the black lenses.

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 26, 2012)

@micahmedia

I don't think there's much CA with Zuiko 45mm/1.8 at all. The samples were obviously mushy JPEGs from camera, I wouldn't say much about sharpness based on these.

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 29, 2012)

Not just samples online (and even if they were, it's not like a camera or bad technique adds CA), I've seen files from the 45/1.8 from an associate who returned it after being disappointed by the image quality. It's got pretty bad CA. And LoCA. No bueno.

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

"its not discrete enough"

what are you ? secret agent ? or wanna snap pics of pedestrians ... well .. it seems you need black edding for you secret gear ;)

2 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (6 months ago)

Brick and BAZOOKA cameras jump out at timid peoiple and inexperienced models more than silver.

They usually see the front lens element and NONE of the lens.

THe IQ is fantastic. Leaves the Canon 85s that people like to worship in the dust.
It even bests the (better) Nikkor 85/1.4.

Canon's 135 f2.0 nearly competes though, costs a bit more, and is huge and heavy by comparison.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
danaceb
By danaceb (May 25, 2012)

I love big beautiful lenses, specially when they are not made from brass like a dumbell around ones neck. Aluminium for these sizes please. This beautiful Olympus lens makes me want to buy a m43, lets see how the IQ turns out.

2 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14

I see sharper than any competing lens and nice bokeh

0 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (May 25, 2012)

Let the equivalence arguments begin... again....!

3 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (May 25, 2012)

/Hopefully/ we won't have to as DPR already mention in terms of DOF: "In this respect it behaves much like a 100mm F2.4 lens would on an APS-C camera, or a 150mm F3.5 lens on full frame."

2 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 25, 2012)

As long as people think focal length is a measure of angle of view, this problem will never go away.

People don't seem to understand that using a camera for 30 years does not teach you physics, mathematics or signal processing.

People of no technical background: Please stop assuming that whatever the guy who taught you to use a camera in 1976 said will be the final word on photography forever. 35mm focal length on one format is still 35mm on another format, but focal length is not a measure of angle of view, and so the angle of view from a 35mm lens on one system will not be the same as the angle of view from a 35mm lens on another system. And the same goes for f-numbers and ISO sensitivities. That's just the way it is. No matter what the guy said. I'm the new guy now, listen to me instead.

2 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (May 25, 2012)

If FOV is the apropos unit to use to describe the FOV of a lens across multiple formats, what unit should be used for OOF blur thats not f-stop since the same f-stop across different formats creates different OOF blur? b-stops (blur-stops)?

b-stop=f-stop * format_factor
format_factor = 135_horizontal/format_horizontal (lets just use 135 as the zero point since its the most ubiquitous)

0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 25, 2012)

Some function based on angle of view an aperture, yes. Quantifying depth of field is difficult, but some type of Light Capture Factor or something like that would be sufficient. After all, our understanding of how a certain ƒ-number looks at a certain focal length for a certain sensor format is just something we learn to quantify for ourselves, ƒ/whatever doesn't really say anything. Probably you would use a specification based on radians. Someone will work out a good standard for this.

The strengths of a new set of camera system specifications is also the weakness though: A camera manufacturer that sells lenses to be used on several formats need to have two sets of values for a lens.

Your method of calculating from 135 is also workable, though legacy-based. Just like one uses T-stop for cine lenses, you might use b-stop or a-stop or e-stop for non-135-systems, just to have a legitimate name for it.

0 upvotes
Entropius
By Entropius (May 25, 2012)

All these arguments make me wish some people would have paid more attention in physics class.

Ultimately, though, they're only really useful for people comparing between systems: as a Four Thirds shooter, I know that ISO 400 is as noisy as it is, and a 75mm f/1.8 will give me so much DOF and angle of view, and that's good enough for me, since the most important thing to know is which lens to reach for to get the picture.

Yes, I know that's equivalent in "number of photons collected", angle of view, and DOF to ISO 1600 f/3.6 150mm, but that's only math that's important if I'm trying to compare systems.

For us 4/3 shooters, 75mm f/1.8 is just 75mm f/1.8.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 25, 2012)

Ok, shall we talk about horizontal, vertical, or diagonal field of view? How does this work with images of different aspect ratios?

Focal length and aperture work just fine, thank you. They are immutable figures. (well, we could throw in T-stops if we want to talk about actual speed too, but I digress) If the user can't figure out what aperture and focal length will mean to their images themselves, then no other more esoteric number will make sense either.

And despite all the yammering about diffraction, there are lenses that still look excellent stopped down past the diffraction point, and some that decidedly do not. THIS has more to do with lens design than "physical" limitations suggest, and is rarely discussed in any forums. Sometimes you NEED to stop down more than 5.6 on APS-C or 8 on FF. Some lenses do this better than others.

0 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (May 25, 2012)

FA 77/1.8 Limited
Maximum Diameter 64 mm
Length 48 mm
Weight 270 g

FF lens

M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8
63.5mm diameter x 69.5mm length
Weight 304 g

why the lens for 4/3 bigger and heavier than for FF?

3 upvotes
igorek7
By igorek7 (May 25, 2012)

The FA 77mm f/1.8 consists of 7 lens elements in 6 groups,
has no internal AF motor and relies on a slotted drive screw operated by the camera. This lens extends a little when focusing towards close distances.
The optical formula of Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is comprised of 10 elements in 9 groups, has internal focus with AF motor.

8 upvotes
oluv
By oluv (May 25, 2012)

i would also prefer a pancake tele, especially for small mFT cameras like GF5 or EPM1, even if it was optically not up to the same standard like this lens.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (May 25, 2012)

And how about image quality?

1 upvote
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (May 25, 2012)

You will get better illumination and most likely better corner performance. Olympus is doing this since 4/3 started. Just check their 35-100mm f2. They simply "oversize" lens a bit and result is obviously much better lens than if you design it so it "just covers 4/3 sensor".

0 upvotes
Jon Rty
By Jon Rty (May 25, 2012)

The Pentax K mount has a flange distance that's over 20mm longer than that of m43. Add 20mm to 48mm, and you've got 68mm, or almost exactly the length of the Olympus 75mm F/1.8.

4 upvotes
bg2b
By bg2b (May 25, 2012)

The 77 has fairly swirly bokeh even on APS-C, e.g., http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickharris1/4567416731/

Olympus says the 75 is specifically designed for round blur circles even at the frame edges.

2 upvotes
Managarm
By Managarm (May 25, 2012)

(m)4/3 lenses also feature telecentric design which is a lot more important for digital sensors than it is for film for which the 77/1.8 was designed. For the same reason in general lenses designed for digital sensors tend to be bigger than film lenses, as the angle of light falling on the sensor has to be controlled more strictly.

3 upvotes
ogl
By ogl (May 25, 2012)

Hmm...Flange distance? You want to say that m4/3 = mythical compactness. OK. We add 20 mm, and what then? We will get the same dimension, but one lens covers FF, and second covers m4/3.

1 upvote
ogl
By ogl (May 25, 2012)

A lot of fans of Oly with marketing inside the brain.
FA77/1.8 is one of the best portrait lens in the world.
It's funny to read about bokeh from man which never used FA77.
Your sample is funny...It's not bokeh, it's aberration with image of bubbles.

1 upvote
bg2b
By bg2b (May 25, 2012)

I didn't say the 77 was a bad lens--I agree it's very nice. However, it's bokeh wide open _does_ exhibit cut off blur circles. If you want a different example, try http://www.flickr.com/photos/sparcher/5286269243/

I was only pointing out why the 75's front element seems a bit large. Olympus has specifically said it's for maintaining round blur circles even wide open.

3 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 25, 2012)

The irregularities have to do with the subject matter, not something inherent to the lens. And that image certainly sells me on the quality of that lens!

EDIT: after looking closer, I take that back. Lots of LoCA and you're right, the bokeh has some funny business going on around the edges. And there are some ugly coma blobs. And it doesn't look as sharp as my Nikon 85/1.8D, which I'm pretty sure is an older design.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
1 upvote
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 26, 2012)

Highlight circless aren't round near edges with FA 77/1.8, but exhibit "cat eyes" effect. I think even the Zuiko 45/1.8 has more round highlights.

Also resolution on edges is mediocre at large apertures.

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/128-pentax-smc-fa-77mm-f18-limited-review--test-report?start=1

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 26, 2012)

Ooh, I didn't realize PZ had a review of the 77mm. Yeah, ew...my 85/1.8 definitely blows it out of the water: http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/622-nikkorafd8518ff

Hmm. I need to start blogging reviews of my lenses...

1 upvote
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14

two words
AF
Quality

0 upvotes
ebosch
By ebosch (May 25, 2012)

it's almost feels like olympus deliberately doesn't offer black ver of this lens (and the 12mm & 45mm) to crank sales of silver bodies. It worked rather well, the silver om-d sells as well as the black ver, something even olympus did not expect.

0 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (May 25, 2012)

silver body omd is already selling as good as black one..

0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 25, 2012)

Are they making more money on the silver bodies? Why would they try to manipulate people into buying one over the other?

1 upvote
ebosch
By ebosch (May 25, 2012)

nah it's just random thought, so take it with a grain of salt. My point is if only they make it in black.. it would look great on black e-m5 imo.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 26, 2012)

black color is prefered when shooting subjects that are very close. for this lens, maybe black is better but it shouldn't be a problem, either.

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

they make those lenses silver, so that stupid costomers get that its metal i guess

0 upvotes
Mandeno Moments
By Mandeno Moments (May 25, 2012)

Memo to Olympus: black versions of your lenses will please people who own black camera bodies and desire to have their equipment as inconspicuous as possible.

13 upvotes
W.C. Green
By W.C. Green (May 25, 2012)

Even if it were similar to the silver 12-50mm... it has black focus and zoom rings and looks better. These solid silver jobs look like the old, cheap Kenko lenses for the early 2 and 3 megapixel OLY cameras. Just looks cheap, and sorry, but If I fork out $900 on a portrait lens I want it to look like a $900 portrait lens. If you make a grip with silver metal and black rubber to go with the silver body- fine, the silver lens works. But please try to make it all match up, visually. I detest those white Canon lenses on black bodies.. ugh! Take note, OLY.

1 upvote
rrr_hhh
By rrr_hhh (May 25, 2012)

Personnally I like the silver : they don't look like a cheap thing, but like the Zeiss Contax G lenses I do still have.

I would like to have a white and silver version of the E-M5 that would make it a perfect companion to my white E-P3 :-).

But I nderstand why those having a full black body would also like black versions of these nice primes. May be there will be wheather sealed versions in black once !

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (May 25, 2012)

Looks like a nice lens, but I would make the call for releasing silver and black at the same time. As it is, as much as I would like to buy this lens, I hesitate because there is no black version.

What would be worst would be to release the black lens x months after the silver one. A sure way to p1ss off those who wanted black but bought silver because there was no black option at launch.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
nico-foto
By nico-foto (May 25, 2012)

Absolutely agree with what Calvin just said.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (May 26, 2012)

Yeah, I bet they will eventually release a black ver, just like Sony. And yes, it will just p!ss people off. They're thinkin in terms of sales (people that want black may buy twice), but they are just going to sour people who wanted black to start with AND kill the market for new silver lenses, which will then be competing with used versions.

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 25, 2012)

I think you made an error with APS-C eq. lens specs.

It should be only 92.5mm/f2.11 for Canon APS-C and 98.3mm/f2.25 for Nikon APS-C.

Diagonal ratios APS-C Canon / MFT = 1.233X and 1.311X for the rest.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

PLEASE ... tell me youre joking, the this was the best sarcastic comment ever on this forum ... if now ... well ... get a life :)

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (May 25, 2012)

Can we please stop referring to 135-format as "full-frame"? It's factually wrong because 135-format cameras are not always full-frame. It's actually a fact that the Nikon FX-format sensors are the only known cameras to support a crop-sensor mode. Not to mention the fact that Micro Four Thirds and Four Thirds are both full-frame formats -- despite having a smaller sensor.

Quit using language wrongly!!!!

8 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (May 25, 2012)

What you just said makes no sense.

13 upvotes
Enrico Barile
By Enrico Barile (May 25, 2012)

You are absolutely right! I don't use the terms "full format" or "full frame" anymore. Actually all sensors are "full frame". To me it's more correct to use the size or a specific name, so: 24x36, APS (APS-C), 4/3 etc. No more "full frame" and "middle format". And please observe, I'm rather old (57), but I'm not nostalgic...

3 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

Are you speaking in Newspeak because I have no idea what you just said.

Sounds like you are trying to rename FF, quad-m4/3 but that would just go against industry convention not to mention annoyingly long.

4 upvotes
Sarig
By Sarig (May 25, 2012)

Language relies on social usage; and most everyone from producers to users refer to 35mm digital sensors as full frame. Your usage isn't wrong either, but since language isn't decided by natural law, ask yourself, if you have two different definitions of a term, and 99% use one of them, which one is most likely to communicate what you intend to?

2 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (May 25, 2012)

if the 4/3rd is a full frame, does that mean D800 is "double full frame"? Inconvenient, huh? Lets keep it simple as it used to be.

1 upvote
curtisls
By curtisls (May 25, 2012)

Dark Goob is correct. Terms like full frame, FLM, and crop factor were introduced to help users of the 35mm format understand how their lenses would perform on digital bodies that had smaller image areas (sensors).
If you really want to go to the origins, the term Full Frame goes back to the movie industry, where it referred to using the full gate of the film. While it was 35mm film, it was 4/3 because the film travels vertically through the gate, not horizontally. As a result, the actual image was about 18x24mm, not 24x36.
In photography, the term full frame originally meant that the image circle of the lens(es) covered the entire frame, but did not exceed it. In this sense, 35mm and 4/3 are both full frame, APS-C is not. The same can be found in "medium" format cameras where image sensors are often smaller than the image circle of the lens and thus not "full frame."

0 upvotes
villagranvicent
By villagranvicent (May 25, 2012)

I agree... Medium format cameras are also full frame, so 4x5, or 8X10 are. On the other hand I think Olympus and Panasonic lenses should have used lens nomenclature according to their "field of view"... if the 20mm 1.7 behaves like a 40mm in 135 format and the equivalences seems to be so important why not call it a 40mm?

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

wtf are you talking about ?
photography is older then digital

and even in analog times we called it half format if you use half of a 135-film aka DX

and because you obviously dont bother to read a book by yourself:

digitally they started with DX which all photographers at this time, knew as half format. so what they did when they introduced the original 135format is ... tadaaaa : call it full format

its a name ... you know ?

it doesnt mean that it only uses half of the sensor or the full sensor, i mean come on ... seriously ... you really think THATS what it means ? ^^

0 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Jun 6, 2012)

In response to the OP:

NO.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

'full' is marketing speak to imply inferiority in other's choices. It has no true value beyond that.

My RB67 was 'full' frame, but a 5x4 shooter might disagree.

Fact is ... the quality obtainable from smaller sensors is remarkable and way beyond what 35mm could ever do.

0 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (May 25, 2012)

Thumbscrew lens hood?!?!? Ewww.

5 upvotes
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (May 25, 2012)

and for a lens of this price, not having it in the box is a rip off.

6 upvotes
Michele Kappa
By Michele Kappa (May 25, 2012)

And the color! Yuck! And the font engraved on the lens? Despicable. And that curved big thing in front... the lens? Whooooo! Too big!

Thank god we're not at war and these aren't actual problems.

2 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

@michelle kappa, well that depends, if youre US citizen you are constantly in war since the 1940ies ... remember ? the korean war never ended till today, its just on pause mode hehe

0 upvotes
Albert Ang
By Albert Ang (May 25, 2012)

It's really a weird focal length. I actually expected fast 17mm f1.8 or f2 (35mm FOV equivalent in 35mm camera).
Also, hopefully m43 manufacturers don't forget that flash system is as important as body and lenses. "Pro-like" body and lenses, should be supported with sophisticated flash system. I would love to see Oly and Pana can compete with CaNikon with respect to lighting.

1 upvote
400trix
By 400trix (May 25, 2012)

Pretty much all of Olympus current µ4/3's cameras support wireless TTL via IR flashes, with a very similar feature set to CLS.

3 upvotes
ch01
By ch01 (May 25, 2012)

It's not really wired, something like Canon 135L but a little bit more tight

0 upvotes
dark goob
By dark goob (May 25, 2012)

If you want a fast 17mm, don't forget Voigtlander has just launched its 17mm 0.95 Nokton for Micro Four Thirds......

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (May 27, 2012)

I'm afraid 17/0.95 (34/1.9 equiv. about the same as popular 35/2s for 35mm format) is the only 17mm lens here that can be call fast. it should be categoried as a moderately fast handy prime.

0 upvotes
inevitable crafts studio
By inevitable crafts studio (May 29, 2012)

i think this system is not meant to be pro ^^its a small system to acompany your pro system

1 upvote
W.C. Green
By W.C. Green (May 25, 2012)

Looks like quality, but I want a black body OM-D with grip and that silver lens looks awful on the black body. Sorry, but my degree is in art and looks are almost as important as function in my book. Gotta make it in black before I will buy.

9 upvotes
Calvin Chann
By Calvin Chann (May 25, 2012)

Me too.

3 upvotes
tlong3234
By tlong3234 (May 25, 2012)

I want one!!!

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

I don't think this lens is weather sealed so be careful when shooting with E-M5.

2 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (May 25, 2012)

How does that change anything? It is always nice to have a sealed body even if not all the lenses are sealed.

2 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

You reacted negatively when someone tells you a lens is not sealed and take should be taken when shooting in a wet environment even if the camera is sealed?

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (May 26, 2012)

Not everyone who shoots with an E-M5 shoots in the rain.

0 upvotes
PioneerPhoto
By PioneerPhoto (May 25, 2012)

And I thought white lenses looked bad...

4 upvotes
RRJackson
By RRJackson (May 25, 2012)

Aw man, what about those white Mitchell high speed cameras that NASA and the military used to use? Those were cool. They were white to minimize heat when used in the desert.

0 upvotes
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14

0 upvotes
Bjrn SWE
By Bjrn SWE (May 25, 2012)

The only bad is that the silver lens doesn't match a black body. A black lens usually goes well with a silver/black body though! - Just my opinion.

1 upvote
jmmgarza
By jmmgarza (May 25, 2012)

Now if only the Sony NEX had lenses of this quality.

11 upvotes
T3
By T3 (May 25, 2012)

Sony NEX is losing a lot of potential customers because of their weak lens selection. It's really too bad.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 25, 2012)

You have the sigma 30mm F2.8. Sharpest lens for the nex system at this time.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

NEX is a year behind m4/3. I hope by next year SONY would have a few upper-class lenses for the NEX system. Having Sigma and Tarmon releasing lenses helps fill the gap.

1 upvote
Jorginho
By Jorginho (May 25, 2012)

It is more like two years behind in that perspective.It seems with the OM-D it has lost what was its strength: sensor superiority. I actually expected things to go the other way around.

4 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (May 25, 2012)

Unfortunately as I got it NEX is pretty much a dead end, quality lenses for nex system will be both too Large and too Expensive, and we have sony against both olympus and panasonic here, its 2 againt 1 ...

5 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 25, 2012)

Sigma 30mm/f2.8 may be sharpest (I don't know) lens for Nex, but its not the sharpest lens for MFT. I wonder how the corner performance is with the NEX version, not too good propably.

1 upvote
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

@ Jorginho
Most of the good lenses for m4/3 were released within the last year. SONY promises at least a G and a Zeiss lens within the next 12 months.

I have no idea who comes up with the idea that E-M5's sensor is as good as 2nd gen SONY 16mp. It would be against the laws of physics for that to be true.

@ DarkShift
The Sigma lenses are the simplified version of the ones on DP series. Since DP have very short flange distance, I would expect it to work better on NEX than m4/3. Don't know for sure. If anyone can chime in.

1 upvote
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 26, 2012)

@Peiasdf

Idea:
Just look at RAW studio samples from DPR or other sites. Nex 5N seems to have worse high ISO noise on shadows than OM-D.

It has lower base ISO which gives it advantage.

1 upvote
love_them_all
By love_them_all (May 25, 2012)

150/3.5 eq isn't exactly attractive. Lenses just sound more exotic in the smaller sensors. 75/1.8 sounds so much more interesting. :) Although given a real 135/3.5 on the ff or this lens, I may get this lens because of the faster shutter speed. Noise and everything else put aside.

4 upvotes
Gao Gao
By Gao Gao (May 25, 2012)

Faster shutter speed isn't always favorable though. Say, for example, strobist work often requires working under the x-sync speed. I shot an outdoor portrait session using 70-200/2.8 @ ISO 200, F/2.8, 1/160s on my 5D2 a couple of weeks ago. Although this 75/1.8 should give similar DoF, the shutter speed will exceed sync speed by two stops. Having to work with ND filters can be troublesome.

0 upvotes
DarkShift
By DarkShift (May 25, 2012)

2 stops? OM-D has X-sync speed 1/250s which is faster than 5D mkII.

2 upvotes
Gao Gao
By Gao Gao (May 25, 2012)

Sorry for being unclear - the 2 stops refer to matching the DoF under even brighter conditions, instead of the parameters I was using. 5D2 does have ISO 100 for that. I recall reading it somewhere in the forums that E-M5 requires 1/200 to be clear of any shutter shadows.

Still - I am seriously considering getting the E-M5 for the size, weight and AF speed.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Cax
By Cax (May 25, 2012)

love_them_all: You are not making the connection between shutter speed and noise here. The 75/1.8 doesn't have "more speed, more noise" than a 150/3.5, it has EXACTLY THE SAME, it's just that the f-numbers and ISO numbers are going to be different. The image will be the same. Just like 75mm gives the same angle of view as 150mm. This is why we call them equivalent. But you need to consider "equivalent ISO sensitivity" to comprehend it completely.

1 upvote
photohounds
By photohounds (Jul 9, 2012)

What 135/3,5 has a front lens element that big? or performance like this? http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1521/cat/14

85/1.2 or 1.8 or 1.4 can't match that sharpness at any aperture they can all do.

0 upvotes
tjbates
By tjbates (Aug 23, 2013)

150/3.5 isn't attractive until you stop down a Canon EF 85mm 1.2 L or 50mm 1.2 L just enough til it looks as sharp and contrasty as the Oly 75mm 1.8 wide open.

0 upvotes
brkl
By brkl (May 25, 2012)

Since when is 150mm a portrait lens?

3 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (May 25, 2012)

Ummm people use 300-400mm lenses for portraits as well. It gives a nice flat field of view. 85mm isnt the "ideal" portrait lens. its just where the FL is long enough to be flat and pleasing.

Have you never seen a full body portrait with a 200mm F2? Now thats a things dreams are made of!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
karasumi8
By karasumi8 (May 25, 2012)

The 80mm rule of thumb for portrait lenses is for full frame/35mm. The crop factor doesn't change the "compression effect" where longer local lengths make things look flatter or closer together. So the 75mm focal length here is right for that effect.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (May 25, 2012)

It was. But today standart is somewhere between 85 to 105. Not long ago it was 135. And I prefer it to shorter lengths.

Bear in mind, that it isnt 150mm, it will look like if you cropped regular 75mm f1.8 lens on full-frame to mimic 150mm field-of-view (with DOF equiv of f3.5-4).

So actually its short, not long, but it is at that bare minimum for decent portraits, as long as you wont try to get too close to subject (which with 150mm FOV you wont anyway).

People sometimes dont understand that its just FOV and DOF equiv. of x2 lens on full-frame, but real focal length doesnt change. Thats still those 75mm.

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (May 25, 2012)

karasumi8

You wont get that effect anyway, thats possible only with "real" long lens. Eg. 4/3s 150mm f2 for example.

If someone likes this effect, I can recommand buying full-frame camera (5Ds are dirty cheap these days) and some fast enough (f4 or faster) 300mm lens. Or digital medium format, if someone is rich enough (or film, thats quite cheaper and 6x7 has plenty of details and huge lot of MF look :D).

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (May 25, 2012)

Longer focal lengths tend to me more flattering for portraits. If I have enough working distance, I like to shoot between 135 to 200mm. I know one portrait photographer who shoots with a Canon 100-400, shooting at the long end, because he thinks the longer focal length is the most flattering for tight headshots. Most people like to stay around 100mm because longer focal lengths put more distance between you and your subjects, and most people like to stay closer.

1 upvote
dancindon
By dancindon (May 25, 2012)

"and most people like to stay closer." Indeed, I shoot lots of portraits of my Colombiana friends almost daily in my rather small hotel room here in Medellin and the Oly 45 serves beautifully (amazing lens for the price and perfect focal length for me). With this new lens I would have to climb out the window to get these shots. Of course others have different needs and this may well turn out to be a stellar lens. I just really appreciate that Oly has given us the wonderful 45 at such an affordable price

1 upvote
Klarno
By Klarno (May 25, 2012)

@karasumi8:
actually, the only thing that affects perspective compression and expansion is distance from sensor to subject. Focal length has nothing to do with it. If you take one shot with a 12mm lens and another with a 300mm lens of a subject from the same distance, I assure you that the perspective compression is identical.

Or try cropping the 300mm frame from the 12mm shot, and display both side by side at the same size--the perspective will be the same..

3 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (May 25, 2012)

The amount of nonsense posted in here is incredible.

4 upvotes
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (May 25, 2012)

I declare victory! they mentioned the effect f/stop

1 upvote
WT21
By WT21 (May 25, 2012)

This will be a major staple lens in three years for m43. There will be enough used lenses, and enough price drop, that even the budget conscious, when they need a portrait lens, will get one.

1 upvote
highwave
By highwave (May 25, 2012)

Sample pictures next please Dpreview

Ones with wide open Bokeh with as beautiful renderings as you could possibly get thank you

2 upvotes
inorogNL
By inorogNL (May 25, 2012)

first samples here http://olympus-imaging.jp/product/dslr/mlens/75_18/sample/index.html
Looks damn well :)

0 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (May 24, 2012)

Without doubts this should be a fine lens.
But the trend of manufacturers providing "pre-production" units to reviewers is plainly annoying. Reviewers cautiously report abut products, the "production and proper" testing does not happen for a long time - and if any "problem" or weakness is attributed to "pre-production" unit, unlikely to be fully addressed in fully production ones. It's quite likely the early buyers will get the very same units and all the polishing will happen later (that's what the warranty is for). This is the 99% finished product (Made in Japan, they rarely turn back and start from the scratch) and if I read properly the second last sentence (written in a very politically correct voice) , it leaves me wondering if the lack of the lens hood was really the biggest concern...
Or the DPR has run out of brick walls?

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (May 25, 2012)

It is not a new trend - look back over the years and you'll see plenty of previews written based on pre-production cameras. The difference is that we now try to give some early impressions, rather than say nothing.

Pre-production samples vary and can be anything from hand-made examples to one of the first production-line test models. This can have an impact on the lag between the initial sample becoming available and one that represents the one available to customers. There's no way of knowing (and it's meaningless to speculate) how finished each example is. We do know of examples where the production process has been changed because the early samples were problematic.

In my first impressions, I've written about what I've seen. But there's no point me testing anything if I can't show the results and they might not mean anything anyway. I haven't not-written about any discoveries - trying to read between the lines to see what isn't there will only drive you mad.

6 upvotes
ZorSy
By ZorSy (May 25, 2012)

Thanks Richard, appreciate you effort and it's certainly not DPR fault - manufacturers are often rushing products and these "first impressions" are just about handling, not the performance. With lenses, not much in there - optics is what counts. As if it would make any difference manufacturers waiting another few weeks and handing over "early production" unit, which would be fair. You guys dance as they play and I wish you were allowed to post "pre-production" samples as well (no full tests, just some meaningful shots comparable later with production units). The folk would understand they are not production ....and I just can't imagine you juggling this lens from hand to hand and not shooting "something". DPR should be able to make these early comments (good or bad), not just give a politically correct speech - it does not represent the final product. This way, reviewers just got manipulated into pre-order game - and that is IMO the dishonest part played by manufacturers. Thx

0 upvotes
Twebain
By Twebain (May 25, 2012)

Exactly my thought.
The panasonic 14-42mm X is a most prominent example for this tactic - it's been going through the media for i think months before any solid image samples appeared.
Oh look: turns out afterwards the promised 'X-quality' is non existent plus the lens is flawed.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 24, 2012)

My 2 cents

75mm F1.8 has the same DOF no matter what format camera its mounted on.

DOF of this lens is perfect for portraits.

No need to stop it down.

Lots of special glass reduces the need for post corrections.

You get what you pay for and this lens is worth every penny and it will not drop in price for a long time.

13 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (May 24, 2012)

;) you mean there more to a lens than just f-stop?

0 upvotes
Graystar
By Graystar (May 25, 2012)

That's a misleading statement. Same DOF, but not the same FOV. As you change your distance to get the same FOV as another format, your DOF changes. That's why the crop factor applies to the maximum aperture when equating DOF performance.

3 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 25, 2012)

Its not misleading, its just a fact. Your the one trying to "convert" numbers for your own purpose. Everyone loves shallow DOF, but being a owner of the canon 501.2L and the 851.2L, too shallow became a issue. Some of us want a nose or ear in focus and not just eye lashes.

This lens was designed for portraits and great bokeh.
They made it 75mm for this reason (no need to convert number but if you need to, convert it to the format you use Pentax Q, Nikon J, u/43,APS-C,FF,MF,LF...ect)
It is considered a Telephoto lens non the less, check out specs for the FOV.
Its a beautiful lens that you will get Bokehlicious results with.
-From D800 owner

7 upvotes
Peiasdf
By Peiasdf (May 25, 2012)

@ Mssimo
Maybe you should have taken DOF into account when you purchased 50 f/1.2L and the 85 f/1.2L. Kinda calls into question your opinion on 75 f/1.8.

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 25, 2012)

@Peiasdf The 1.2L's are great lenses but they are large and DOF makes them very hard to work with. You have the way change the way to shoot. I also wish canon had a low ISO of 10 in order to shoot wide open in the day light without 3 ND filters stacked in front of the lens.

3 upvotes
John Mason
By John Mason (May 25, 2012)

I also have the 85 1.2 and 50 1.2. If a person finds the DOF hard to work with, these lenses have a great feature. You can stop them down ! :)

The 75 1.8 option, while requiring more distance for proper framing, should address that FF thin DOF look when wanted in the m4/3 format. I'm sure this is what Olympus had in mind in coming out with it.

Be fun to see the samples!

2 upvotes
Gao Gao
By Gao Gao (May 25, 2012)

DoF is based on the entire image - two pictures need to have the same perspective and field of view to be comparable.

0 upvotes
Peter 13
By Peter 13 (May 25, 2012)

Make it 1 cent. Just use any DOF calculator to prove yourself wrong.

It is equivalent to about 150/3.6 on 35mm, that is all.

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 28, 2012)

@Peter 13

How about its a 75mm F1.8? The lens does not care what camera yo u mount it on, it will produce the same DOF. Yes, you will have to stand about twice as far if its on 4/3 or many times as far if its on a Pentax q but the DOF is the same.
What your trying tell me is that this 75mm is not a 150mm (Duh) and yes...a 150mm will produce a shallower DOF. There you go Peter, We can hold your hand till you get it.

0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (May 24, 2012)

Near Leica quality without the Leica price! ;)

8 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 24, 2012)

lots of nice glass in the lens.

5 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (May 24, 2012)

How do you know?

8 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 24, 2012)

• 3 Extra-low dispersion glass elements
• 2 High Refractive Index glass elements

9 upvotes
Norm - Waterloo
By Norm - Waterloo (May 25, 2012)

I just don't know why you'd put such a good lens on such a low quality body/sensor. In my humble opinion, M4/3 just doesn't have the resolving power needed to really make this work. Is it sexy, yes! Will the shots, compared to other M4/3 lenses look fantastic - yes. But it's still M4/3 which is only slightly better than higher quality P&S compacts.

4 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (May 25, 2012)

It should be able to go toe to toe with the best APC cameras. D7000, Nex 7, K5, 7D and so on. You need to understand the physics on why u4/3 sensor is the "perfect" size. The older sensors were bad but it did not stop people from taking beautiful pictures. This lens will serve the current and future gen u4/3 cameras well. As soon as I get a silver E-M5, I will put one of these on order. I plan on using it for wedding along with the D800.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (May 25, 2012)

@Norm - Waterloo: maybe you should read the review of the E-M5 before making misinformed assumptions like m4/3 "is only slightly better than higher quality P&S compacts".

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
DStudio
By DStudio (May 25, 2012)

Yes, @Norm, I have one of those "higher quality P&S compacts" - the Olympus XZ-1. While it's a great camera, there's a huge gap between it and my K-5. There's no way the XZ-1 could approach the image quality of the current u4/3s cameras, especially the E-M5. In fact, it can't even reach the narrow FOV of this lens at all - it can only go to 24mm at f/2.5 (equiv. to FOV of 112mm on 135, or approx. equiv. to 55mm @ f/5.8 on u4/3!).

2 upvotes
toscha_seidel
By toscha_seidel (May 25, 2012)

@Norm The fact you have inferior sensor doesn't mean you have o make bad lenses. Even if the have crappy sensors in the past (for some people), Olympus still made very high quality lenses that outresolve their sensors. The difference is telling by mounting a HG lens on E-5 when compared to past models. And this can be done because the lens quality is so good.

0 upvotes
sillette
By sillette (May 25, 2012)

Although it is a 75mm lens, it is not a portrait lens. It would be if the sensor was full size but it's not. This lens is a medium long telephoto, portraits with it will look a bit squashed.

1 upvote
DekHog
By DekHog (May 27, 2012)

Oh, c'mon guys, leave Norm alone, he's only out for the weekend.....

0 upvotes
Total comments: 213