*sigh*. To vent, I really wish someone would come out with a 67.5mm f/2. I guess or an f/1.7 if they really just have to come as close as possible to duplicating a FF 135mm f/3.5. It was one of my favorite walk around mid-telephotos. Just such a useful FL.
I love me my Sigma 56/1.4. And that Olympus 75/1.8 might tick the box even though it is a little longer than 67.5. But the 56 is just a wee bit too short, I suspect the 75 will be a wee bit too long. And frankly both are chunkers. I know, way smaller and lighter than FF. But just packing my new camera bag (which has stretched a fair amount, which is nice), and it isn't just the fact that the 56/1.4 is kind of thick, it is still some hefty weight for backpacking. I know kit is always some kind of compromise. And if I end up with the 40-150/4 to go with my 12-45/4 plus a 7.5/2 probably is the absolute perfect backpacking kit to cover all the things. But I just love me some primes. And I'd imagine with a decent design, a 62.5mm f/2 would probably be 20-30% lighter than the current 56mm and 75mm offerings and maybe 10% smaller. Heck, even rolling at a 62.5mm f/2.2 would be fine to get it a little smaller. That is still a useful 1 2/3 stops faster than an f/4 zoom at considerably less size and weight. And longer enough than a 12-45/4 to be a nice addition for a longer lens.
Dunno. Anyway, I am leaning towards picking up the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 sometime after this trip. I just don't know if it'll be it, or the 40-150/4 as my next lens. Because I think the slightly smaller diameter, even though it is heavier and longer, than the 56/1.4 might make it a better go to for an ultralight weight backpacking setup. 7.5/2, 12-45/4 and 75/1.8. Swap the 75 for the 40-150/4 when weight and space are at slightly less of a premium or when the extra reach is really needed. I am leaning more towards the hike below the rim might just be the 7.5/2, 12-45/4 and 56/1.4.
I did find on my last two trips that if you remove wildlife photos from my last trip, mid tele in the ~56mm range was pretty often used. I checked the FL on the pictures I took with my 40-150/2.8 in Colorado in May and the times I used it for non-wildlife photos, almost 100% of them were between 50-80mm. When I did Oregon last summer, I didn't carry any zooms. I think the break down was that my brand new 9mm f/1.7 got about 40% of the action, then I think it was my 12/2 got about 20%, then my 56/1.4 was about 20%, but just a little less than the 12/2, then my 17/1.8 was around 10%. And then my 45/1.8 and 25/1.4 each had just a few pictures taken with them.
For my 12-45/4 in Colorado that's about what I found too. Pictures taken with it, most were around 12mm with just a few in the 15-45mm range (probably 70% of those taken were at 17mm or less). Though my 9/1.7 got a lot less use in Colorado than in Oregon. Maybe just 20% of the pictures in Colorado were with the 9/1.7. Some really fantastic pictures and I am glad I had it. But less. Other than the 9/1.7 the only other prime I used was my 12/2 for about 6 pictures.
A 67.5mm would have been absolutely perfect in there for just a little more reach, but not a lot more...
C'est la vie. But Panasonic or OM, if you are reading this, could you please consider making one? Heck, Laowa, if you decide to make a longer FL lens, could you consider a dedicated m4/3 67.5mm around f/2? I think I'd seriously consider dealing with a manual focus longer FL lens to have one. For landscape and backpacking, I don't have to deal with fast action, so focus peaking and taking my time would be fine 98% of the time.
Or hell, Sigma if you decide to make M4/3 compatible new lenses again, take note!
Would be nice, I actually went looking around for vintage lenses before I bought the Oly 75/1.8, I think there were some 60 or 65mm Oly SLR lenses that were kinda tempting but after adding an adapter there wasn't much of a size or weight advantage, so the modern lens just made more sense. To give you a sense of what's possible, I'm gonna mention a few FF lenses around that FL (the image circle doesn't seem to impact size/weight nearly as much at these focal lengths as at wider ones).
Sigma actually makes a FF 65/2 already that's optically excellent and close to the size of the 56/1.4 or 75/1.8, but it's kinda overbuilt (as most of their smaller FF primes are) and weighs in at a hefty 405g, and it's not that much cheaper than the Oly. OTOH their 90/2.8 DN is a little smaller and weighs in at 295g, I don't own an APS-C body and already own a FF short tele but if I ever got a crop body I'd get that FF 90/2.8 right away just to have a tiny 135mm equivalent.
Those are available in E & L mount btw. The 90/2.8 also focuses closer than most. I do have a 775g 135/1.8 (one of the lightest around) & a vintage 325g 135/5.6 (Canon FD, adapted to E)...
Yeah I've come to like the FL, thanks in large part to the Oly 75/1.8. What about if you use cheaper/lighter construction than all these metal clad primes tho? Enter the Samyang 75/1.8 (my FF short tele), it's about the size of the Oly but very plastic and weighs in at 230g rather than 300g, even tho it's still a FF lens that's pretty good optically (sharper and nicer rendering than Sony's larger 85/1.8). So that seems to be the most obvious way to get weigh down, lighter plastic construction.
Well that or making them slower, but yeah, I actually wish someone would make a FF 135/3.5 or even 150/3.5 right now, with AF and modern optics (there's a Batis 135/2.8 but it's kinda overbuilt IMO at 600g, I bet dropping the OIS alone gets it to 500-550g).
The Oly 75/1.8 seems to be super well built tho, I remember reading a teardown of it at LensRentals, and I think the long standing rumor is that Sigma designed it, so they seem to have a knack for these. Sigma's old 60/2.8 was optically excellent as well, it's discontinued now but you should be able to find it cheap used (was like $220 new in M4/3 mount but was sold for several APS-C mounts too), and it weighs only 190g. Felt super right at home on the GM1.
It's not much smaller than the 56/1.4 tho, I used a borrowed Sigma 60/2.8 a buncha times for concerts before I got my Oly 75/1.8 and it was very fun, tho for those purposes the extra speed/reach of the latter is welcome.
