Olympus PRO vs. regular lenses

Pro+:
  • Weather resistant
  • Brighter
  • More durable
  • Various OIS or other features like teleconverters
Pro-:
  • Heavier
  • Larger
  • More expensive
Basically, unless you have a strong, specific need for the Pro lenses, I recommend against them. These needs might include:
  • Professional photographer using them every day
  • Focal lengths greater than 300mm
  • A lot of use in low light or other reasons for low light performance
  • Use in adverse conditions
The main argument for MFT (or APS-C) is smaller, lighter, and cheaper hardware with acceptable performance. Pro lenses go against that argument.
I don't agree with your conclusion. But do agree that you can exponentially pay a lot more for every nth degree of better performance.

M4/3 like all other systems offers both affordable gear and high performance gear at eye-watering prices. There is no need to buy the top gear even in FF systems if you don't see the value in the extra cost. Nobody moans when they have "affordable" FF gear that the well heeled and pro-shooters can buy really expensive gear.

But somehow there is this "thing" that all M4/3 gear should be affordable. There is plenty of affordable gear available for M4/3 and there is no need for those that wish to keep their investment low to even consider the top level M4/3 gear. You can pay quite a lot to get not a lot more performance (just like when you buy FF gear).

So my argument is that you can get top notch performance out of M4/3 gear and it is not a sacrifice if you are willing to pay appropriately.

However nobody is forcing anyone to buy the most expensive gear that M4/3 offers. The affordable level is still pretty good.

If M4/3 was limited to only affordable gear then it would quickly be seen as only a "poor-man's" system and the free mobile phone camera would soon enough kill it off.

So for every recommendation to go FF "for better" there is a caveat that entry level FF is easily beaten by Pro-Level FF gear at just as big a premium as Pro-Level M4/3 gear. ... and of course there are plenty that still blandly recommend the 1" sensor RX100 as a pretty good image maker.

So we all have a dream that if we spend even more money our photography will be enhanced. If you can afford it you can live that dream even in M4/3 by buying the very best gear that the system offers.
 
I see the AF/MF clutch as a negative...too easy to deploy accidentally.
You can turn the feature off in the menu to prevent accidental deployment.

It's a very polarizing thing. You either love it or hate it. There seems to be no middle ground. The split is about 50/50.

I love it. In m43 only Olympus has it. I am more likely to buy an Olympus lens that has it. And I am less likely to buy an Olympus lens that does not have it.
It's not a deal killer but it adds unnecessary mechanical complexity and I would rather not have it on any lens.
On some lenses Panasonic has an aperture ring. Sadly it's not supported on Olympus cameras. For me, it would be ideal to have both an aperture ring and a focus clutch.
Panasonic has started putting a AF/MF clutch in their more recent high performance lenses. The 25-50/1.7 has it. I cannot provide a list.

For those obsessed by the great lenses that Olympus offers there are some equally great lenses being offered by Panasonic if they would only open their eyes to what the other M4/3 brand can do.

This is a rather large but really exceptional performing lens that carries its bulk very well. It feels as solid as that rock and is incredibly well built but so perfectly balanced and not so heavy that it is a joy to use. Cannot recommend it enough.
 
for my part, i am no professional, just an eager hobbyist.

Have an E-M5 MKIII and previously the E-M1 original. When i got the E-M5 MKIII it came as a kit with the 14-150 II. Thats a nice compact lens with some weather resistance. Light weight as well and takes decent pictures.

i also said that i wanted the 12-100 Pro and got it as well. To be honest, the Sync-IS is shockingly good and makes things very sharp. Low light is still a bit of a question mark due to the F4.0 but in many situations it does quite well. I can imagine that it would be great/awesome on a E-M1 MKIII or an OM1.

If i were to choose between the two, i would still go with the 12-100 due to its sharpness, the L-FN button and overall quality. its heavy and not a perfect balance on my camera body but i just like the pictures it takes. I also use the Oly 100-400 so you can tell that the weight is not a significant bother to me. I have a P100-300 that sits on the shelf...

HOWEVER, YMMV depending on the cost delta , which is large and the weight difference which is also large....
I would recommend that just for the purpose of investigative science that the 12-100/4.0 be tried with IBIS switched off and only its lens-IS then we might get a better idea of worth between IBIS and ILIS. The in lens IS of this lens is shockingly good on its own and worth more than being the faint praise of being 'just a helper' to make IBIS more effective.
 
But MFT top lenses are reasonably light and cheap for what they are. Even the Panasonic f1.7 zooms fit that.

The only lenses that don’t are the f1.2 primes, and they were a special case. Even so, the deals Olympus offered just before the transition to OMS were pretty good.

There are still small options like the GX9 and EM5.3 with many smaller and cheaper lenses available, including an ocean of used ones.

Andrew
 
I see the AF/MF clutch as a negative...too easy to deploy accidentally.
You can turn the feature off in the menu to prevent accidental deployment.

It's a very polarizing thing. You either love it or hate it. There seems to be no middle ground. The split is about 50/50.

I love it. In m43 only Olympus has it. I am more likely to buy an Olympus lens that has it. And I am less likely to buy an Olympus lens that does not have it.
It's not a deal killer but it adds unnecessary mechanical complexity and I would rather not have it on any lens.
On some lenses Panasonic has an aperture ring. Sadly it's not supported on Olympus cameras. For me, it would be ideal to have both an aperture ring and a focus clutch.
Panasonic has started putting a AF/MF clutch in their more recent high performance lenses. The 25-50/1.7 has it. I cannot provide a list.
That is good to know, I had no idea.

Just out of interest I have a question. The Olympus focus clutch, when activated, limits how close the lens can focus. How much depends on the lens, but it can be annoying. Is this the same problem with the 25-50, or is Panasonic's clutch improved?
For those obsessed by the great lenses that Olympus offers there are some equally great lenses being offered by Panasonic if they would only open their eyes to what the other M4/3 brand can do.

This is a rather large but really exceptional performing lens that carries its bulk very well. It feels as solid as that rock and is incredibly well built but so perfectly balanced and not so heavy that it is a joy to use. Cannot recommend it enough.
Unfortunately it's way out of my price range :) . And quite heavy too with 654g.
 
Last edited:
+ Linear focus motors (voice coil type), albeit the non-pro 60mm has that too
Only the 40-150 f/2.8 and 100-400 use voice coil motors. The rest use stepper motors, even the 300 PRO and 150-400 PRO.
 
the 12-200 can be had used for much less money than the 12-100
Funnily enough, I've found a brand new 12-200 costing 10% less than a new 14-150. How can it be? Model number is V316030BW000. Is there something wrong with that?
It may be a grey import, without official warranty in your country. It may have to be sent overseas should any warranty repair be needed. Or the price may be without import duty in your country.

Me personally, if the price is right and it is a reputable overseas seller, I would not worry at all about warranty. In all my life I never had a lens needing a warranty repair. Just make sure you can return the lens for a full refund, should it be DOA.
 
Last edited:
+ Linear focus motors (voice coil type), albeit the non-pro 60mm has that too
Only the 40-150 f/2.8 and 100-400 use voice coil motors. The rest use stepper motors, even the 300 PRO and 150-400 PRO.
Oops, you are right. I thought there were more pro lenses using voice coil focusing. Turns out it's only my 40-150. It actually uses dual voice coil focus motors.

The 100-400 apparently only uses voice coils for the IS system, but not for the focus drive.
 
+ Linear focus motors (voice coil type), albeit the non-pro 60mm has that too
Only the 40-150 f/2.8 and 100-400 use voice coil motors. The rest use stepper motors, even the 300 PRO and 150-400 PRO.
Oops, you are right. I thought there were more pro lenses using voice coil focusing. Turns out it's only my 40-150. It actually uses dual voice coil focus motors.

The 100-400 apparently only uses voice coils for the IS system, but not for the focus drive.
Oh whoops, my bad; that makes sense though as most IBIS and OIS systems use them.
 
In-camera focus stacking and Pro Capture (in case you wish to do some birding) have more limited lens compatibility lists--all Olympus.
Sorry if I return to this topic, but unfortunately I'm still confused.

In the end, I bought a second-hand E-M5 Mark III body--I gave more importance to light weight and compactness.

Now, regarding the lens, I read that in-body focus stacking works only with the PRO line from Olympus, plus some few some other non-PRO Olympus lenses:


Can you confirm this?

As for Pro Capture, is there the same limitation in compatible lenses?

I'm considering two non-PRO Olympus lenses (14-150 II and 12-200 mm), as well as the Panasonic 14-140 II.

If I understand it right, focus stacking wouldn't work with either of the three lenses. However, I don't know whether there would be any difference regarding Pro Capture.

Thanks!
 
I would recommend that just for the purpose of investigative science that the 12-100/4.0 be tried with IBIS switched off and only its lens-IS then we might get a better idea of worth between IBIS and ILIS. The in lens IS of this lens is shockingly good on its own and worth more than being the faint praise of being 'just a helper' to make IBIS more effective.
My only non-IBIS body, the GM5, is comically tiny with the 12-100 but OIS does very well. It's the only way I can use just the lens IS.

The 300 OIS is also very effective with the GM--of course the benefit is more evident in the viewfinder, with the great magnification of that FL. 12mm doesn't really show any effect in the finder, so dragging the shutter is the only way to know it's working.

Cheers,

Rick
 
The Panasonic 8-18 has a switch on the left side of the lens barrel for mf-af. I’d forgot about and was driving my self crazy when the lens would not focus one afternoon. Must have bumped it when putting camera in a bag.
 
I see the AF/MF clutch as a negative...too easy to deploy accidentally. It's not a deal killer but it adds unnecessary mechanical complexity and I would rather not have it on any lens.
I switch from AF to MF with a quick button press (red record button.) IMO, the MF Clutch would be less convenient for me.
 
I see the AF/MF clutch as a negative...too easy to deploy accidentally. It's not a deal killer but it adds unnecessary mechanical complexity and I would rather not have it on any lens.
I switch from AF to MF with a quick button press (red record button.) IMO, the MF Clutch would be less convenient for me.
Switching between AF and MF is not the reason to have the MF clutch. because THAT can indeed easily be done with a button - and much cheaper.

In fact, you do not even have to assign a button, nor slide the focus ring back to enable the focus clutch. Just turning the focus ring in it's forward position puts you temporarily in MF mode.

***

The real purposes of a focus clutch are these:

- with the focus ring back, you have absolute position control of the focus ring. There are hard stops for near and infinity. The travel of the focus ring is limited to some 45 degrees. Just like with old mechanical lenses you get a tactile position feedback. To many people coming from the MF film days, this absolute position control is worth gold! It gives them back the familiar feel of a truly manual lens.

- you can put a manual focus position into memory. And you can return to this exact position at any time, just by sliding the focus ring back. Meantime you can do AF or MF with the focus ring in it's front position, as often and as long as you want, and taking pictures. But as soon as you pull the ring back, you re-establish the exact memorized focus position.

Example: you have established a focus from a given location you are standing or sitting. And now you are waiting for an event to happen. In the meantime you want to take some pics say of the surroundings. As soon as you see the event you were waiting for begins unfolding, just slide the focus ring back to the memorized distance and shoot. No need to wait for AF to establish focus.

- you can preset a manual hyperfocal focus distance. Using the hyperfocal scale that is revealed as you slide the ring back. Completely independent from what you do with AF or MF. Whenever you pull the ring back, you re-establish that preset hyperfocal distance.

***

By the way, the name focus clutch is misleading. In m43 it is not a true mechanical clutch. It is still focus by wire technology. It electronically mimics the operation and feel of a mechanical focus clutch. It is a virtual focus clutch. And because of that, the closest focus distance is longer than when using AF, or when using MF with the focus ring in forward position. And the infinite focus stop is also not spot-on as it is with manual lenses. But it is still way better than standard AF lenses where the focus ring rotates infinitely with the added crutch of two-speed sensitivity.....

***

All that said, I think that people that grew up with AF alone are less likely to appreciate this focus clutch feature. And vice versa.

- people that grew up with AF are less likely to understand how (and why) to use hyperfocal distance settings. They are used to rely on AF, and yes AF has become a lot faster. But there are still situations, like when it is too dark for AF to work fast and reliably or other objects trick AF, when Hyperfocal settings still make sense to shoot fast action.

- People that grew up with AF are less likely to even know what absolute control of the focus ring means and feels like.

***

PS: and just a reminder, not only expensive big and heavy pro lenses have the focus clutch. The small and lightweight 12/2 and 17/1.8 have it too!!! I have both these lenses, and not once did I accidentally and unknowingly activate the clutch. It just does not happen, because the lenses are so small the focus ring does not catch when taking out or putting into a bag. Unlike say the 40-150pro, where the focus ring regularly gets dislodged because the large lens is a tight fit in my bag.
 
Last edited:
In-camera focus stacking and Pro Capture (in case you wish to do some birding) have more limited lens compatibility lists--all Olympus.
If I remember it right, focus stacking isn't available on E-M1 Mark III, is it?
For the following cameras a hacked firmware is available, that will allow you to use ANY arbitrary AF-capable lens regardless of brand for focus stacking: EM5.2, EM1.1, EM1.2. See here: https://www.mu-43.com/threads/modified-firmware-looking-for-users.99804/
As for Pro Capture, I can't remember...
It just has to be a lens with electric contacts
Anyhow, even consumer Olympus lenses support such features?
No, without hacked firmware only few select Olympus lenses can do focus stacking, and only on cameras that support it.
 
Last edited:
I see the AF/MF clutch as a negative...too easy to deploy accidentally. It's not a deal killer but it adds unnecessary mechanical complexity and I would rather not have it on any lens.
I switch from AF to MF with a quick button press (red record button.) IMO, the MF Clutch would be less convenient for me.
On the 12-100 (which is the best lens I've used in any format) the focus clutch gets a lot of use.

On my 300mm I've disabled the focus clutch because it's not convenient (given the lens size). Also my OpTech lens loops keep engaging the clutch.

But I am a fan of the focus clutche's availabilty.
 
Last edited:
The clutch works superbly well on the 12-100.

I use manual 'focus by wire' a lot with my FF 105mm Sigma lens, and I have to say it's horrible to use, as is the Olympus 60mm when focused manually. Just as well that both lenses are extremely sharp.
 
Last edited:
The clutch works superbly well on the 12-100.

I use manual 'focus by wire' a lot with my FF 105mm Sigma lens, and I have to say it's horrible to use, as is the Olympus 60mm when focused manually. Just as well that both lenses are extremely sharp.
I suppose if I had a lens with a clutch I would use it, but I wouldnt't buy a lens just for that feature.
 
Pro+:
  • Weather resistant
  • Brighter
  • More durable
  • Various OIS or other features like teleconverters
Pro-:
  • Heavier
  • Larger
  • More expensive
Basically, unless you have a strong, specific need for the Pro lenses, I recommend against them. These needs might include:
  • Professional photographer using them every day
  • Focal lengths greater than 300mm
  • A lot of use in low light or other reasons for low light performance
  • Use in adverse conditions
The main argument for MFT (or APS-C) is smaller, lighter, and cheaper hardware with acceptable performance. Pro lenses go against that argument.
Specifically the 14-150 mk II is an incredible lens for the weight and cost. It's my go to walking/hiking lens. Never had an issue with rain , snow etc

Check my Flickr for a lot of pics with it
I envy you. My 14-150 sucks past 100
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top