Not sure I'm feeling the Olympus 75mm f/1.8...

When Olympus had the $100 discount, I decided to try this lens out. Now that I've had it for a few days, I am wondering whether or not to keep it.

First of all, picture quality is superb. But given that just about every MFT lens has very good picture quality, that can't be the only point behind a lens. The lens is great and delivers. I'm just not sure I am a fit for the lens.

I knew how long 75mm would be. I have the 45mm f/1.8 and 60mm f/2.8 macro, so I fully expected a longer lens. That's not the problem. I'm just not sure I was prepared for these three issues:

1) Focusing distance. The 75mm can't focus closer than 33 inches. This is a problem for me because it makes the lens hard to use in indoor situations. 33 inches is quite far and it's easy to lose track of my working distance, especially when working with smaller subjects like babies and cats. I think if I had maybe another foot, even half a foot, of working distance, it'd make it so much easier to use this lens. As it is, I can't fill the frame with just the head of a baby or cat. It'd be fine for adults, sure, but adults aren't as willing subjects. I snap a lot of cat photos to help me learn how to use lenses.

2) Shutter speed requirements. The 75mm is a natural fit for a larger camera like the GH4, but needing 1/150 or faster shutter speed limits my ability to use it easily. It's not really a huge deal, because I'd been dealing with some of the same issues with the 60mm f/2.8 (which has a lower shutter requirement, but is only f/2.8). Once again, this makes the lens hard to use indoors, but thankfully I do have an Olympus body as well.

3) Focus is pretty fast, but since it's such a long focal distance CDAF lens, it seems that sometimes the focus box just doesn't pick up enough detail to focus, so the lens ends up hunting until I choose a different box. This, I learned to deal with quickly enough, but the problem is that I'd find myself sometimes wandering into those 33 inches and trying to focus and assuming the lens was just hunting, and then focus wouldn't happen, then I'd have to back up. It's overall not very intuitive for me.

I think the surprising thing for me is that when I orderd the 60mm f/2.8 macro, I almost immediately had buyer's remorse, since I'm simply not a macro shooter, but once it arrived, I found it to be such a great all-purpose lens that I can't imagine getting rid of it. The only thing it can't do is shoot in low light, but it's so great at everything else. And really, given how 75mm f/1.8 probably has to be stopped down to f/2.8 for a lot of portraits and can't fill the frame as well as even my 45mm f/1.8, I'm not sure it really even has an advantage. Let me illustrate.

This is about as close as I can get with my 75mm. It's not any greater magnification than my normal and 45mm lenses. What I really wanted was to be able to use the focal length to have a more natural perspective of tight shots, and I didn't realize how limiting the .10x magnification would be.

This is with the 60mm. This is far from a macro, but this is about as close as I would have wanted to go, so that I could back up a tiny bit and fit the entire face into the frame. So we're probably talking like a 0.14x-0.16x magnification level that would have been enough for me.

Of course, the 60mm can do this, too. And this is why I love that lens.

So I'm wondering if other shooters have encountered these issues with the 75mm lens and what their long term solution was. I wonder if I hold onto the lens and learn to love its limitations, or if I sell it. I wouldn't return it because philosophically speaking, I don't believe in returning a perfectly working gear when it was my damn fault for buying it, so I would sell it to 2nd hand, so I'd take a bit of a loss, but I have a perfectly useful Panasonic 45-150mm and an Olympus 60mm f/2.8 which cover a lot of my telephoto needs.

As an aside, I'm starting to see why the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 is so well considered. There's a need for long lenses to be able to focus reasonably close, and that lens has a much more useful 0.14x magnification and is so inexpensive! Plus, f/2.8 is about what you need to get both eyes reliably in focus, so that lens is exactly enough for a lot of people.

honeyiscool wrote:

So I'm wondering if other shooters have encountered these issues with the 75mm lens and what their long term solution was.

I bought it expecting that it would be a niche lens, so it's no surprise that it doesn't get used nearly as much as the 45/1.8. I wasn't going to buy it at all, but there was a good deal, and I could afford it, and I would have wanted it forever otherwise, so...

These things are toys for grownups anyway, and cheap compared to sailing or golf or cars.

Well, to each his own. But I wouldn't trade my 75mm for anything.

The 75/1.8 is not designed to be a macro, low-light, or indoor lens.  You really can't fault the lens for that.  I have it, and when used within it's intended purpose in mind, it performs superbly.  This is akin to being disappointed with a Maserati because you can't haul a refrigerator in it.  Based on your expectations, I don't see you warming up to this lens unless you decide to start using it as a telephoto lens, for which it was designed.  Give it some time, if you still can't warm up to it, sell it and get something that better suits your needs and expectations.  Cheers.  -Norm

honeyiscool wrote:

When Olympus had the $100 discount, I decided to try this lens out. Now that I've had it for a few days, I am wondering whether or not to keep it.

First of all, picture quality is superb. But given that just about every MFT lens has very good picture quality, that can't be the only point behind a lens. The lens is great and delivers. I'm just not sure I am a fit for the lens.

I knew how long 75mm would be. I have the 45mm f/1.8 and 60mm f/2.8 macro, so I fully expected a longer lens. That's not the problem. I'm just not sure I was prepared for these three issues:

1) Focusing distance. The 75mm can't focus closer than 33 inches. This is a problem for me because it makes the lens hard to use in indoor situations. 33 inches is quite far and it's easy to lose track of my working distance, especially when working with smaller subjects like babies and cats. I think if I had maybe another foot, even half a foot, of working distance, it'd make it so much easier to use this lens. As it is, I can't fill the frame with just the head of a baby or cat. It'd be fine for adults, sure, but adults aren't as willing subjects. I snap a lot of cat photos to help me learn how to use lenses.

2) Shutter speed requirements. The 75mm is a natural fit for a larger camera like the GH4, but needing 1/150 or faster shutter speed limits my ability to use it easily. It's not really a huge deal, because I'd been dealing with some of the same issues with the 60mm f/2.8 (which has a lower shutter requirement, but is only f/2.8). Once again, this makes the lens hard to use indoors, but thankfully I do have an Olympus body as well.

3) Focus is pretty fast, but since it's such a long focal distance CDAF lens, it seems that sometimes the focus box just doesn't pick up enough detail to focus, so the lens ends up hunting until I choose a different box. This, I learned to deal with quickly enough, but the problem is that I'd find myself sometimes wandering into those 33 inches and trying to focus and assuming the lens was just hunting, and then focus wouldn't happen, then I'd have to back up. It's overall not very intuitive for me.

I think the surprising thing for me is that when I orderd the 60mm f/2.8 macro, I almost immediately had buyer's remorse, since I'm simply not a macro shooter, but once it arrived, I found it to be such a great all-purpose lens that I can't imagine getting rid of it. The only thing it can't do is shoot in low light, but it's so great at everything else. And really, given how 75mm f/1.8 probably has to be stopped down to f/2.8 for a lot of portraits and can't fill the frame as well as even my 45mm f/1.8, I'm not sure it really even has an advantage. Let me illustrate.

This is about as close as I can get with my 75mm. It's not any greater magnification than my normal and 45mm lenses. What I really wanted was to be able to use the focal length to have a more natural perspective of tight shots, and I didn't realize how limiting the .10x magnification would be.

This is with the 60mm. This is far from a macro, but this is about as close as I would have wanted to go, so that I could back up a tiny bit and fit the entire face into the frame. So we're probably talking like a 0.14x-0.16x magnification level that would have been enough for me.

Of course, the 60mm can do this, too. And this is why I love that lens.

So I'm wondering if other shooters have encountered these issues with the 75mm lens and what their long term solution was. I wonder if I hold onto the lens and learn to love its limitations, or if I sell it. I wouldn't return it because philosophically speaking, I don't believe in returning a perfectly working gear when it was my damn fault for buying it, so I would sell it to 2nd hand, so I'd take a bit of a loss, but I have a perfectly useful Panasonic 45-150mm and an Olympus 60mm f/2.8 which cover a lot of my telephoto needs.

As an aside, I'm starting to see why the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 is so well considered. There's a need for long lenses to be able to focus reasonably close, and that lens has a much more useful 0.14x magnification and is so inexpensive! Plus, f/2.8 is about what you need to get both eyes reliably in focus, so that lens is exactly enough for a lot of people.

honeyiscool wrote:

When Olympus had the $100 discount, I decided to try this lens out. Now that I've had it for a few days, I am wondering whether or not to keep it.

First of all, picture quality is superb. But given that just about every MFT lens has very good picture quality, that can't be the only point behind a lens. The lens is great and delivers. I'm just not sure I am a fit for the lens.

I knew how long 75mm would be. I have the 45mm f/1.8 and 60mm f/2.8 macro, so I fully expected a longer lens. That's not the problem. I'm just not sure I was prepared for these three issues:

1) Focusing distance. The 75mm can't focus closer than 33 inches. This is a problem for me because it makes the lens hard to use in indoor situations. 33 inches is quite far and it's easy to lose track of my working distance, especially when working with smaller subjects like babies and cats. I think if I had maybe another foot, even half a foot, of working distance, it'd make it so much easier to use this lens. As it is, I can't fill the frame with just the head of a baby or cat. It'd be fine for adults, sure, but adults aren't as willing subjects. I snap a lot of cat photos to help me learn how to use lenses.

2) Shutter speed requirements. The 75mm is a natural fit for a larger camera like the GH4, but needing 1/150 or faster shutter speed limits my ability to use it easily. It's not really a huge deal, because I'd been dealing with some of the same issues with the 60mm f/2.8 (which has a lower shutter requirement, but is only f/2.8). Once again, this makes the lens hard to use indoors, but thankfully I do have an Olympus body as well.

3) Focus is pretty fast, but since it's such a long focal distance CDAF lens, it seems that sometimes the focus box just doesn't pick up enough detail to focus, so the lens ends up hunting until I choose a different box. This, I learned to deal with quickly enough, but the problem is that I'd find myself sometimes wandering into those 33 inches and trying to focus and assuming the lens was just hunting, and then focus wouldn't happen, then I'd have to back up. It's overall not very intuitive for me.

I think the surprising thing for me is that when I orderd the 60mm f/2.8 macro, I almost immediately had buyer's remorse, since I'm simply not a macro shooter, but once it arrived, I found it to be such a great all-purpose lens that I can't imagine getting rid of it. The only thing it can't do is shoot in low light, but it's so great at everything else. And really, given how 75mm f/1.8 probably has to be stopped down to f/2.8 for a lot of portraits and can't fill the frame as well as even my 45mm f/1.8, I'm not sure it really even has an advantage. Let me illustrate.

This is about as close as I can get with my 75mm. It's not any greater magnification than my normal and 45mm lenses. What I really wanted was to be able to use the focal length to have a more natural perspective of tight shots, and I didn't realize how limiting the .10x magnification would be.

This is with the 60mm. This is far from a macro, but this is about as close as I would have wanted to go, so that I could back up a tiny bit and fit the entire face into the frame. So we're probably talking like a 0.14x-0.16x magnification level that would have been enough for me.

Of course, the 60mm can do this, too. And this is why I love that lens.

So I'm wondering if other shooters have encountered these issues with the 75mm lens and what their long term solution was. I wonder if I hold onto the lens and learn to love its limitations, or if I sell it. I wouldn't return it because philosophically speaking, I don't believe in returning a perfectly working gear when it was my damn fault for buying it, so I would sell it to 2nd hand, so I'd take a bit of a loss, but I have a perfectly useful Panasonic 45-150mm and an Olympus 60mm f/2.8 which cover a lot of my telephoto needs.

As an aside, I'm starting to see why the Sigma 60mm f/2.8 is so well considered. There's a need for long lenses to be able to focus reasonably close, and that lens has a much more useful 0.14x magnification and is so inexpensive! Plus, f/2.8 is about what you need to get both eyes reliably in focus, so that lens is exactly enough for a lot of people.

Exactly why I bought the Sigma 60 2.8 a few weeks ago. It works awesome with extension tubes, too.

I would send it back. Lesson learned. I learned the same thing a few years back with a canon 85 1.8 on a cropped body.

When you wonder if you love someone, that's because you don't really love that person.

The M.Zuiko 75mm is very sharp, like many other m4/3 lenses. However, its bokeh is among the best.

That being said, if you don't need it, sell it.

I'm using mine when I'm going at an indoor zoo. That's the only reason why I keep it.

Tony8232 wrote:

Send it back if it's not suited to what you need.There is no sense in hanging on to it. It's too long to be used indoors. Heck my 45mm is about as long as I would care to go indoors for general photography.

Send it back? How about hang onto it a bit longer than a few days to shoot it some more, then if it still doesn't suit the OP sell it to someone else. Sending it back to the place one bought it because the OP doesn't like the lens and there's nothing wrong with it is just not right.

I've gotten along swimmingly with my 75/1.8 on my GX7. Fast aperture with IBIS works wonders and the not-so-close focusing hasn't been an issue too many times (it is a 75mm lens after all).

Keep it a while - it might just grow on you.

Jeff Tokayer wrote:

Ulric wrote:

These things are toys for grownups anyway, and cheap compared to sailing or golf or cars.

Or smoking, drinking or gambling.

Well I don't sail, own a racehorse, or a private aeroplane, don't play golf and haven't needed to buy a car for years, don't take expensive holidays, don't smoke, don't gamble, heck, I don't even have a girlfriend (of that sort) ..... working on the drinking  Must be boring.

... I guess that I need another lens or three .....

My mother in law used to own a race horse. She could have bought a few 75/1.8 a month for what it cost to house, feed and train that horse.

b0k3h wrote:

yes:

-its good, but as are the other zuiko primes... i dont find it amazing like others

no:

-there is no way the 60mm is more useful as all purpose. i find its AF so slow, even when focus limiter is set in appropriate range

150mm equivalent lenses arent meant for use indoors. and the shutter speed requirement is what it is.... moreover... olympus ibis makes it a non-issue

i also took a while to warm up to it. it still wont be the first, 2nd, or 3rd lens i buy (12-40 && 45 && some tele...) .... but it is great outdoors

150mm equivalent isn't meant for indoors?  Depends on how big the indoors is now doesn't it.  Unthinking lens focal length dogma at work.

The focal length appropriateness depends on the subject size/desired size in frame, focal length, and distance.  I use mine indoors all the time, but I'm fine with the MFD of this lens for my intended uses.

Sometimes indoors is my small living room, sometimes it's a coffee shop, sometimes it's a gymnasium.

For an indoor, medium close range portrait lens the 75mm is definitely not idea (unless you like very tight portraits :D).

I love mine though.

I loved that lens and I also have  the 60mm macro  , but I found that the 75mm spent most of its time in the bag  so I ended up selling it when I got the 40-150 2.8  and  that lens gets lots of use .

Lucas McDonald wrote:

I loved that lens and I also have the 60mm macro , but I found that the 75mm spent most of its time in the bag so I ended up selling it when I got the 40-150 2.8 and that lens gets lots of use .

If you want 150mm up close the Oly 40-150/2.8 focuses really close in (but it's only f/2.8:-))

Lucas McDonald wrote:

I loved that lens and I also have the 60mm macro , but I found that the 75mm spent most of its time in the bag so I ended up selling it when I got the 40-150 2.8 and that lens gets lots of use .

I, too, wonder if the 40-150 2.8 is a better lens for me. I swear by my fast primes for wide and normal focal lengths, but I just don't feel like f/2 or faster is necessary with the longer lengths. Certainly the 40-150 with its impressive magnification and minimum focal length is very attractive, as it would get me some wonderful shots and also be a weather sealed lens for my GH4, too. As for OIS, whatever, right? I have a tripod and it's not like shooting 150mm handheld is all that easy anyway.