Olympus M. Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, Event Photographer's Tele Lens

[wiryawan]

I am not a professional photographer, but once in a while I am volunteering to help photographing an internal office event or something like that.

For such event photography, I will usually use two lenses with large aperture and I will mostly bring two bodies, my GX8, and my GX7. One of the lens will be a normal zoom which most of the time will always be my 12-35mm f2.8, And the other lens will be a tele lens. The choice for such tele lens will be Oly 45mm 1.8, this lens, Oly 45-150 2.8, or the Pan 35-100 2.8.

Oly 45-150 2.8 is too big so I'm not interested in that at all. Although I'm sure it's a fantastic lens!

The 45mm....it's just too short, so I don't use it. It's small, sharp, and really great for portrait as well as for general use, but it's not working really well in event photography.

The 35-100 2.8 from Panasonic makes so much sense as the tele lens in this situation (flexibility of zoom, IS for my Panasonic bodies, almost as sharp, not too large as well), but I somehow purchased the 75mm lens instead. I am more attracted to the f/1.8 aperture as well as the focal length more than anything to be honest ;-) ...

Anyway, I use this lens to shoot something far away from me in the event, to get some close up pictures. Mostly, it's gonna be a candid of some people listening to other people's speech, or a close up of the person delivering the speech. I am mostly after their facial expression and shoot very far away from them so they don't notice me. The 75mm is delivering quite a tight field of view, so it performs well for such task. So the 75mm is my go to tele lens for event photography.

Since this is not a zoom lens, I have to move back and forth to frame my shots properly. Luckily I have the 12-35mm with me bolted to the GX8 all the time, so I can use the long end of that 12-35mm lens to mimic anything between 35mm and 75mm by walking a bit closer to the subject, and then I use the 75mm to mimic anything a bit longer than the 75mm by walking closer to the subject or by cropping in post.

The lens is amazingly sharp even wide open, and at f/2.8 I think it's already reaching its peak performance(not much visible CA in my photos at least).

I use flash (sometimes on camera bounced to something for soft light effect, or off camera with some modifier) and this lens will reveal any small little details in the focused part of your photo.

Sometimes, the lens is so sharp that I even have to reduce the sharpness in post when photographing a person so that the person doesn't look way too sharp, which many people don't really like. This means I also have to be careful when shooting with flash because with the wrong lighting setup I could accidentally amplify that "too sharp" effect further.

Bokeh is not a problem for this lens. At this focal length, depth of field will become thin, and you can easily kill cluttered background with this lens.

Speaking of build quality, it's all metal. It's not that heavy, but it feels very sturdy and seemed to be very durable. I have the lens for more than a year, and the paint job doesn't seem to wear off easily like my Oly 45mm or my 25mm. It's as big as my 12-35mm f/2.8, and it even shares the same 58mm filter thread, which really helps when I need to attach a low-power ND back and forth between some other lenses to do some off camera flash outdoor.

As you can see, there are so many things that I like with this lens. But there are also some things that I don't like with this lens, just to be fair.

I don't like to use this lens for my portrait/headshot lens, since I don't like how compressed everything looks with this lens for headshots. The ears look big, the head just doesn't look right. So I always prefer the Oly 45mm 1.8 for my go to portrait lens and also for headshot. It doesn't compress as much, and things look more pleasant in my taste. But if you are after such compression effect, then by all means the 75mm will give you a better option. Or the 35-100 2.8. Or the 40-150 2.8.

I also don't like to use this lens for travel. It just doesn't make sense to bring this lens for travel in my opinion. The focal length isn't really easy to use for framing an image during travel, and you are better served with something like the 35-100 f/4-5.6 or a 40-150mm f/4-5.6 to get some far-away shots or detail shots during travel.

The focusing is kind of slower compared to my other lenses in my opinion. I think it's because the lens needs to move such large piece of glass back and forth, so it's kinda slow. But it's not a slow lens by any means, it's just a bit slower compared to my other lenses.

The chromatic abberation at f/1.8 could cause a problem if you're shooting some fine contrasty details of some things. You will have to stop down a few stops to eliminate the CA problem.

I don't complain the lack of weather sealing on this lens, because for my applications I don't need weather sealing. Weather sealing will probably 1) add more weight, 2) reduce some sharpness, or 3) make it become more expensive. Or all at once.

Overall I'm happy with this lens as my event photography lens. The things that I don't like don't really matter that much, and it performs really well for my applications. It's my number one choice for event photography tele lens, and for all the things that it does, it receives an easy 5 star from me.





--
Best wishes,
Gary

 

[Hen3ry]

Really good review. I have yoyoed between the 35-100 and the 75 -- and so far, not made a decision. I only actually need one of them for a few events so it is kind of hard to justify buying either. For the time being, I sit on the fence. But thank you for your excellent round-up of your thinking. It will help inform mine when I get to the sharp end of buying one or the other.

You mentioned slowish focusing. I wonder whether that is similar to the problem I have had in low light with the Oly f1.8 45mm. In that case, I concluded that the problem was not the lens or camera but the light and the field of view which mean the focus box was looking at an area with practically no contrast in it. When I thought about it, I came to the conclusion that the fact that it focused at all was practically a miracle! The answer was to move the focus box to include some high contrast within it.

Excellent example shots! I particularly like the drummer with his dark frame. That is top class work in my view.

 

[wiryawan]

Really good review. I have yoyoed between the 35-100 and the 75 -- and so far, not made a decision. I only actually need one of them for a few events so it is kind of hard to justify buying either. For the time being, I sit on the fence. But thank you for your excellent round-up of your thinking. It will help inform mine when I get to the sharp end of buying one or the other.

Hi Hen3ry! Thanks for the kind comment on my review

You mentioned slowish focusing. I wonder whether that is similar to the problem I have had in low light with the Oly f1.8 45mm. In that case, I concluded that the problem was not the lens or camera but the light and the field of view which mean the focus box was looking at an area with practically no contrast in it. When I thought about it, I came to the conclusion that the fact that it focused at all was practically a miracle! The answer was to move the focus box to include some high contrast within it.

I do experience the slow AF feel almost generally. However, it is not that slow to be honest, only a tiny fraction slower than my 12-35 2.8. And it's not slow enough to miss a moment in my opinion. And I think it's still much faster than the old Pan 100-300mm at 300mm, though I have to re-confirm this in the future since I don't use the 100-300mm that often.

Also a contributing factor to the slow-ish AF could be the camera body. In my experience, using the 75mm on my already-sold E-PL6 is much slower than bolting the lens on my Pan GX7. It was very noticeable and I am pretty sure it's the camera body that's causing the slow AF issue. Haven't tried bolting the 75mm on the GX8 yet.

I forgot to mention that I use single AF all the time with AF box right on the center, with the AF box size as small as possible. It is really accurate when I shoot that way, and I can still do focus-recompose technique without being slowed down by the AF. But you are correct, to nail the focus I do have to aim at something contrasty or otherwise the camera will not lock focus.

Excellent example shots! I particularly like the drummer with his dark frame. That is top class work in my view.

Thank you on the kind words on my photos too Hen3ry, really appreciate your kind comments!

 

[Impulses]

Very nice review, taking into account the practicality of the lens as well as the technicalities. Like Henry, I've lusted after it for years, only recently started thinking about the 35-100 f2.8 instead.

I definitely don't *need* either since they're just for personal use, but the 35-100 would definitely be more practical in the long run for things like kid's sports... OTOH I have a feeling I'd actually use the 75mm more in the short term, being smaller and whatnot.

I should borrow a Sigma 60mm that I have access to just to see how much I'd really use/like a longer tele prime like that... The Opt is faster/longer of course but if I end up using the Sigma a lot then I'd know I'd get my money's worth out of the 75mm.

 

[wiryawan]

Hi Impulses, thanks for the kind comment :-D

Regarding of the 35-100 2.8 or this lens, both are strong options as you already said. I tried the 35-100 2.8 again just recently in a camera store, with the lens bolted on the GH4. For general use, I don't think I can find any significant difference between the 75 or 35 100 in terms of sharpness, unless I pixel peep of course in which case the 75 will show slightly sharper result.

My impression after re-trying the 35-100 2.8 a few times is that the lens is very flexible. I find myself zooming a lot back and forth trying to capture subjects in the store, and that time I come to appreciate the convenience and flexibility of a zoom. With the 75mm, I will definitely have to move myself around to compose properly, and sometimes that isn't possible on certain situations.

I use the 75mm lens most of the time on the GX7. And with the rather sub-par IBIS of the GX7, I can still hand-held acceptably sharp shots at 1/60sec occasionally. The 35-100 will definitely go lower than that, especially if you shoot still subjects. So that's one point to consider.

If flexibility is a top priority, then I think the 35 100 will serve you better. To be honest f2.8 isn't too bad for catching up some shutter speed, and depending on the light condition on where you shoot, it might be just enough for what you need.

However, if you plan to shoot like me, with two bodies and another lens(a 12-35 2.8 for example) to complement the 75mm, then the 75mm will shine. I like to think the 75mm as some sort of a superhero that requires a side-kick superhero to cover the "blindspots" of the main superhero.

Hope this helps! Cheers! ;-)

 

[daddyo]

First, I love the images you've posted -- great clarity and excellent capture of emotion/feel. Nice work!

Second, I don't mean this to contend with anything you've written about the 75mm f/1.8 --- it's on my 'would love to own' list. You've written a well articulated review of the lens' pro and con attributes.

That said, I shoot events professionally -- primarily corporate -- and long ago opted for the Pany 35-100mm f/2.8 as a mainstay event lens. The problem that I have using mid to long prime telephoto lenses is that more times than not, my clients want very fast turnaround on the images I capture -- often they want on-site upload for website feeds. That precludes much, if any post processing -- including cropping/framing after capture.

That is where zooms become so essential to me. I generally carry a Bower 7.5mm fisheye as my only prime, and I carry the Oly 9-18mm, 12-40mm, Pany 12-35mm f/2.8 (back up lens), Pany 35-100mm f/2.8, and either my Oly 50-200mm f/2.8-f/3.5 of now, my Pany 100-400mm depending on lighting and long tele needs (e.g. tennis and golf tournaments).

The optical speed of the 75mm would be nice in some very low light situations, but I have not found f/2.8 a problem, given the high ISO performance of my E-M1's. Since my clients use most of my images for brochure printing and website use, I have no problem using pretty high ISO's -- here's an example (This is straight out of camera, except web resizing):





My client might take and image like this, crop out the person to the right in the background and use it in a brochure promoting conference learning sessions.

I'm glad the 75mm is serving your event needs -- hopefully, I will find a great deal on one in the future, as I would love to have it as a low light portrait lens to compliment my 45mm f/1.8.

--
God Bless,
Greg
www.imagismphotos.com
www.mccroskery.zenfolio.com
www.pbase.com/daddyo

 

[Skeeterbytes]

Great and useful review of an excellent lens. Closest zoom is the 35-100/2.0 but at several times the size and weight. The 75 is absolutely not intimidating to the subject, which is another benefit to the little gem.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[wiryawan]

First, I love the images you've posted -- great clarity and excellent capture of emotion/feel. Nice work!

Daddyo, thank you so much for the kind comments on the photos! Really appreciate your kind words

That said, I shoot events professionally -- primarily corporate -- and long ago opted for the Pany 35-100mm f/2.8 as a mainstay event lens. The problem that I have using mid to long prime telephoto lenses is that more times than not, my clients want very fast turnaround on the images I capture -- often they want on-site upload for website feeds. That precludes much, if any post processing -- including cropping/framing after capture.

That is where zooms become so essential to me. I generally carry a Bower 7.5mm fisheye as my only prime, and I carry the Oly 9-18mm, 12-40mm, Pany 12-35mm f/2.8 (back up lens), Pany 35-100mm f/2.8, and either my Oly 50-200mm f/2.8-f/3.5 of now, my Pany 100-400mm depending on lighting and long tele needs (e.g. tennis and golf tournaments).

Such nice lenses you have there! And your choices are laid out well in terms of focal length and your overall needs.

The optical speed of the 75mm would be nice in some very low light situations, but I have not found f/2.8 a problem, given the high ISO performance of my E-M1's. Since my clients use most of my images for brochure printing and website use, I have no problem using pretty high ISO's -- here's an example (This is straight out of camera, except web resizing):

Hey, that makes perfect sense ! The 35-100 would definitely work well in your situation(and in my situation as well probably), and to be able to have such flexibility while shooting an event is an important main strength of the 35-100. To be really honest with you, I bought my 75 more because of the "want" rather than the "need", but I tried to make my 75 work on my need. That f/1.8 is really what got me on the first place, but as you said given the ISO performance of the recent MFT cameras, I also think that 2.8 should be enough in most indoor/low light situation.

My client might take and image like this, crop out the person to the right in the background and use it in a brochure promoting conference learning sessions.

Nice shot, Daddyo!! I love the overall feel of the image, and the image is really tack sharp. I agree with the cropping of the person on the right, and that should make the image stands out more.

I'm glad the 75mm is serving your event needs -- hopefully, I will find a great deal on one in the future, as I would love to have it as a low light portrait lens to compliment my 45mm f/1.8.

Thanks for contributing to my post by providing your thoughts on the 35-100 . I know that there are a lot of people who are trying to choose between the 75 and 35-100 2.8. Therefore, it's good to have your thoughts on the 35-100 2.8 which actually complements what I wrote earlier.

Cheers!

--
God Bless,
Greg
www.imagismphotos.com
www.mccroskery.zenfolio.com
www.pbase.com/daddyo

--
Best wishes,
Gary

 

[wiryawan]

Great and useful review of an excellent lens. Closest zoom is the 35-100/2.0 but at several times the size and weight. The 75 is absolutely not intimidating to the subject, which is another benefit to the little gem.

Cheers,

Rick