The Olympus 12mm F/2

tkbslc wrote:

Marty4650 wrote:

I think the lens is judged harshly because of it's incredibly high price point. People expect a lot for $800, and being merely "very good" may not be enough.

If this was a $500 lens, then it would get 5 star ratings all around. And then it becomes a "must have" lens for M4/3 shooters.

Even when accounting for the better build quality, it just isn't a good value once you realize it costs TWICE as much as a 25mm f/1.8 lens. And that lens comes with a hood. Not a $45 option....

I bet most people would be happier with build like the 17, 25, 45 and a $500 price tag.

I guess there is the 14mm f2.5 for us cheapskates, though...

And to build it like this there would have been one short coming or another like the SLR Magic hyper prime which comes in at around $500 but has the nagging issue of "why do I have to deal with that ugly purple flair."

M43 Dude wrote:

This lens comes in at a price point where most people who seem to migrate to Micro Four Thirds don't want to pay for it. Unfortunately Olympus tried something with it that most people are also not willing to give it credit for.

Olympus marketed this lens as a Pro lens, had it come along a few years later with the Olympus 12-40 and 40-150 peoples opinions might not have been so steadfastly negative about this lens. While I write that, it's your loss if you choose not to pick a copy up.

The Olympus 12mm can now be had for under $500, if you're browsing the open market I've seen it on eBay for less than this.

Yes, Olympus could have made this a PRO lens and thereby justified the sky high price.

But they really can't do that unless they:

• make it weather sealed
• make it perform a little bit better
• include a lens pouch and a very nice hood

And now you have an $800 PRO lens. But as it stands it just doesn't deserve the high price premium. Some folks are down rating the lens simply because it is a bad value. Personally, I just will pass on it, because it really is a good lens. My only problem is that the price is way too high for what it is.

Before I would spend $800 on this lens, I would spend it on a 75mm f/1.8 lens instead. I realize this is just a matter of personal preference, but we already have lots of ways to get 12mm in M4/3, even if the other lenses are slower. (12-32mm, 12-35mm, 12-40mm, 12-50mm), There are only two ways to get 75mm for M4/3. Either the fast prime, or a few very slow zooms.

But eventually I will probably own a 12mm f/2.0 lens, if I can find a used one in very good condition selling for less than $500.

Incidentally, if we are going to discuss used lenses, then you could find a 17mm, 25mm, and 45mm lens all for $800 combined!

I really think Olympus needs to take this 12mm lens UP to PRO grade to justify the price. Or, they could take it DOWN to standard grade and sell it for a more reasonable price. Where it sits right now just doesn't make much sense for anyone except those with lots of money to spend.

dennis tennis wrote:

Last year or two, this forum whas filled with 12mm love, fanboys everywhere saying that its small size justifies the high cost. And now, the unbelievers have ruined its stellar rep?

Someone seems to think that's the case.   Much of this topic & review is about negativity towards the negative, as if that isn't what everything is like nowadays.   Over the top emphatic.

Besides, we all know the thumbs down the lens gets is about the finish that for so long wasn't available in black (unless one paid a hefty premium).  

The samyang 1217mm is looking pretty good to me.

12mm f/2. Not 1217.

Bob Tullis wrote:

dennis tennis wrote:

Last year or two, this forum whas filled with 12mm love, fanboys everywhere saying that its small size justifies the high cost. And now, the unbelievers have ruined its stellar rep?

Someone seems to think that's the case. Much of this topic & review is about negativity towards the negative, as if that isn't what everything is like nowadays. Over the top emphatic.

Besides, we all know the thumbs down the lens gets is about the finish that for so long wasn't available in black (unless one paid a hefty premium).

Yes, the behavior Olympus has with black lenses as being limited editions should be held in the same regard as their "limited edition" lens hoods that don't ship WITH their lenses.

M43 Dude wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

dennis tennis wrote:

Last year or two, this forum whas filled with 12mm love, fanboys everywhere saying that its small size justifies the high cost. And now, the unbelievers have ruined its stellar rep?

Someone seems to think that's the case. Much of this topic & review is about negativity towards the negative, as if that isn't what everything is like nowadays. Over the top emphatic.

Besides, we all know the thumbs down the lens gets is about the finish that for so long wasn't available in black (unless one paid a hefty premium).

Yes, the behavior Olympus has with black lenses as being limited editions should be held in the same regard as their "limited edition" lens hoods that don't ship WITH their lenses.

There was a period they were milking their technology (rather, loyal customer base), but it would appear they're past that time of trouble.   We can tend to personalize such things, but it's only business.

Marty4650 wrote:

M43 Dude wrote:

This lens comes in at a price point where most people who seem to migrate to Micro Four Thirds don't want to pay for it. Unfortunately Olympus tried something with it that most people are also not willing to give it credit for.

Olympus marketed this lens as a Pro lens, had it come along a few years later with the Olympus 12-40 and 40-150 peoples opinions might not have been so steadfastly negative about this lens. While I write that, it's your loss if you choose not to pick a copy up.

The Olympus 12mm can now be had for under $500, if you're browsing the open market I've seen it on eBay for less than this.

Yes, Olympus could have made this a PRO lens and thereby justified the sky high price.

But they really can't do that unless they:

• make it weather sealed
• make it perform a little bit better
• include a lens pouch and a very nice hood

And now you have an $800 PRO lens. But as it stands it just doesn't deserve the high price premium. Some folks are down rating the lens simply because it is a bad value. Personally, I just will pass on it, because it really is a good lens. My only problem is that the price is way too high for what it is.

Before I would spend $800 on this lens, I would spend it on a 75mm f/1.8 lens instead. I realize this is just a matter of personal preference, but we already have lots of ways to get 12mm in M4/3, even if the other lenses are slower. (12-32mm, 12-35mm, 12-40mm, 12-50mm), There are only two ways to get 75mm for M4/3. Either the fast prime, or a few very slow zooms.

A couple of fast zooms too, wouldn't you say, like the 35-100/2.8 and the 40-150/2.8? Not that I think this should prevent you from getting the 75. I consciously opted for it over the 35-100/2.8.

But eventually I will probably own a 12mm f/2.0 lens, if I can find a used one in very good condition selling for less than $500.

Incidentally, if we are going to discuss used lenses, then you could find a 17mm, 25mm, and 45mm lens all for $800 combined!

I really think Olympus needs to take this 12mm lens UP to PRO grade to justify the price. Or, they could take it DOWN to standard grade and sell it for a more reasonable price. Where it sits right now just doesn't make much sense for anyone except those with lots of money to spend.

-- hide signature --

Marty
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
my blog: http://marty4650.blogspot.com/
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6101/6318442842_7b93cb589b.jpg

You're right, it's where the line is drawn that my views somehow represent something that I'm trying to affirm onto others as some suggest here that draws the line in the sand. My views are none other than my own. Perhaps this is necessary for certain members to have this written in my signature, so as they see that point.

I do not speak for others, I just put forward the opinion based on how I shoot and on that bias all things taken into account, it may be significantly different to your requirements. I had thought that would be abundantly clear.

None of the points I have raised in this thread represent anyone's position but my own all comments are based on the way I use the system, each person will have their own requirements to think of before they go out and buy a systems camera.

I encourage each person to deliberate over all of the options available to them before they come to some sort of conclusions about what suits them.

M43 Dude wrote:

You're right, it's where the line is drawn that my views somehow represent something that I'm trying to affirm onto others as some suggest here that draws the line in the sand. My views are none other than my own. Perhaps this is necessary for certain members to have this written in my signature, so as they see that point.

I do not speak for others, I just put forward the opinion based on how I shoot and on that bias all things taken into account, it may be significantly different to your requirements. I had thought that would be abundantly clear.

It's all in the presentation. Your style can be rather aggressive and combative. I see your point in many things you raise, but there's a superior attitude in the delivery delivery that's off-putting. A signature disclaimer doesn't change the tone of the message. It's all in the presentation.

I bought this lens and I like it. I have used it a lot and find it especially useful for family functions inside too. I just uploaded 9 shots using it to my gallery in case you would like to take a look and here is a link to one: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3458251655/photos/3135159/queen-concert

Queen in Dallas in 2014 - shot using my 12mm Zuiko.

Bob Tullis wrote:

dennis tennis wrote:

Last year or two, this forum whas filled with 12mm love, fanboys everywhere saying that its small size justifies the high cost. And now, the unbelievers have ruined its stellar rep?

Someone seems to think that's the case. Much of this topic & review is about negativity towards the negative, as if that isn't what everything is like nowadays. Over the top emphatic.

Besides, we all know the thumbs down the lens gets is about the finish that for so long wasn't available in black (unless one paid a hefty premium).

As price increases, marginal improvement decreases (i.e. for every extra dollar spent, your IQ goes up by a lesser and lesser amount).  On the other hand as price increases, expectations increase exponentially (i.e. for every extra dollar spent, people think they should be getting an ever increasing improvement in IQ).  Thus much wailing and gnashing of teeth was engendered...

Realistic expectations are the way to stay happy

M43 Dude wrote:

What does one say when they see this lens? I often see and here various platitudes from people who have either never owned or never shot with this lens, most of them negative, trivialised, biased and in many cases completely nonrepresentational to any sort of reality about this lens. The lens gets down trodden based on something they read once in a web review of the lens and never seems to get a second look in. The Olympus 12mm F/2 is one of the most harshly critiqued and criticized lenses but is also the most misunderstood and underrated lenses in the Micro Four Thirds lineup. If one lens receives more negative comments in the Micro Four Thirds lens lineup its this one and for the majority of cases the disparagement is entirely misdirected.

From the moment you lay your hands on it, you know there is something about the lens, the way that its built a solid lens built in a metal casing and with low dispersing glass, offering durability that is unmatched in any of the Micro Four Thirds primes. The lens feels solid despite its diminutive size.

The 12mm F/2 gains an advantage from its design using DSA, aspherical, ED, and Super HR elements and it features aan perture range from f/2-22, currently the widest and fastest native prime for Micro Four Thirds. The lens also features silent focusing for movie photography even when tracking moving targets and focus down to 20mm. It features 11 lens elements in 8 groups and a 7 blade aperture ring.

This lens introduces a dual fly by wire focus system with a snap back focus ring, snapped forward in manual focus mode the focus will continue to move freely and continuously, snapped back you get a lock to lock focus ring from 20mm to infinity.

If there is one true fault with this lens its that the Olympus LH-48 metal lens hood is an accessory for this lens and it does not come with the kit, why Olympus continues to follow this trend is beyond reasoning with, however it seems to be part of their practice to charge customers at each opportunity.

Mounting the lens on your camera you will notice that your camera becomes somewhat heavy, I would say this lens adds approximately 150grams of weight to the front of your camera which can feel like quite a lot as compared to some of the kit lenses and particularly on a larger camera like an OM-D or G/GH series camera from Panasonic. This becomes a significant issue where your main aim may be primarily to reduce weight, the lens does not achieve this, but for its build quality its something that I'm willing to put to one side.

Open the lens up and take it outdoors it becomes a perfect accompaniment for the landscape photographer, it's noticeably fast to expose and fast in action making low light photography a breeze even at wide apertures but also at narrow ones. It's easy to get trigger happy and keep clicking photos.

The lens is just as useful indoors and in low light where some assume it may be too wide, it's just right, when using its perspective you can gain some dramatic effects indoors simply and straight forward out of the camera with minimal processing.

This lens from me receives a 4.5 simply on the basis that it doesn't actually come with a hood, and because of its price this is a serious complaint for a lens of this price, but if you need a 24mm lens with no compromises of being part of a zoom there really isn't a lot of other options on the market that are either as fast, silent or that actually auto focus. You can spend more on the Olympus 12-40 F2.8 you can even look at the Panasonic 7-14 F/4 but its not as fast either. If you need a fast lens in this lens width then this lens is hard to overlook.

I like my copy of this lens but find I rarely use it since I got the 12-40 2.8...This post inspires me to try to use it more.