Excellent glass but quite specific

sonnycsc wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

sonnycsc wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

I remember Olympus calling it a portrait lens which I think is a joke . unless you limit yourself to head and shoulders , this lens is kind of useless for most portrait uses , especially indoors

Good grief. 135mm f/2 prime lenses are routinely described as portrait lenses.

135mm was indeed a popular lens in the FILM days but today not so much . again check it out .. and 150mm is different than 135mm in case you did not notice

You can say the same thing about cameras in general.

apples and oranges

They used to be popular back in the day, but not so much now with everyone using phones. Fact of the matter is the lens just didn't work for you, because you didn't find a way to use it.

you should take some time to read some of the threads about that lens or portrait lenses and here only you will find hundreds of posts of people saying the same thing

That's the thing with the 75mm, you need to know what you're gonna use it for.

funny coming from you. does not the same could be said for EVERY focal length ?:-D

I use it for events (not so much now during Covid times) and portraits, and believe it or not, professional portrait shooters do plenty of outdoor sessions and don't complain about focal lengths.

simple thing. Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

Is it that hard to just admit that the lens didn't work for you personally instead of trying to point out all the things that are wrong with it?

I don't remember writing that there is something wrong with the lens . it delivers very good to excellent quality . I am just saying like hundreds of others on these forums that calling it a portrait lens is a stretch . and that in any case it should not really be advised a the MAIN portrait lens

go ahead and read other reviews on that lens to prove me wrong

Raist3d wrote:

sonnycsc wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

sonnycsc wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

I remember Olympus calling it a portrait lens which I think is a joke . unless you limit yourself to head and shoulders , this lens is kind of useless for most portrait uses , especially indoors

Good grief. 135mm f/2 prime lenses are routinely described as portrait lenses.

135mm was indeed a popular lens in the FILM days but today not so much . again check it out .. and 150mm is different than 135mm in case you did not notice

You can say the same thing about cameras in general.

apples and oranges

They used to be popular back in the day, but not so much now with everyone using phones. Fact of the matter is the lens just didn't work for you, because you didn't find a way to use it.

you should take some time to read some of the threads about that lens or portrait lenses and here only you will find hundreds of posts of people saying the same thing

That's the thing with the 75mm, you need to know what you're gonna use it for.

funny coming from you. does not the same could be said for EVERY focal length ?:-D

I use it for events (not so much now during Covid times) and portraits, and believe it or not, professional portrait shooters do plenty of outdoor sessions and don't complain about focal lengths.

simple thing. Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

Is it that hard to just admit that the lens didn't work for you personally instead of trying to point out all the things that are wrong with it?

Exactly. This is a pretty great m43rds lens.

in terms of IQ, yes . Never said otherwise 

Just because it doesn't map to someone's needs and wants (or even if someone made a mistake buying it thinking it would) it means its' the tool's fault or the tool being bad.

again not what I wrote . funny how people seem to try to twist my words . I am sure this peculiar fov has its uses  but for portrait , not the most natural choice

Harold66 wrote:

I don't remember writing that there is something wrong with the lens . it delivers very good to excellent quality . I am just saying like hundreds of others on these forums that calling it a portrait lens is a stretch . and that in any case it should not really be advised a the MAIN portrait lens

go ahead and read other reviews on that lens to prove me wrong

I've read plenty, and with plenty of portrait examples. Clearly people use it for portraits. And I don't recall many reviews saying its focal length is 'useless'. They seemed to say that it's 'unusual', which it is. At the end of the day it's a preference thing and all about how you use your tools, and you might not see it as a portrait lens but there are people who do, and use it for that and more. You can't prove me wrong there.

sonnycsc wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

I don't remember writing that there is something wrong with the lens . it delivers very good to excellent quality . I am just saying like hundreds of others on these forums that calling it a portrait lens is a stretch . and that in any case it should not really be advised a the MAIN portrait lens

go ahead and read other reviews on that lens to prove me wrong

I've read plenty, and with plenty of portrait examples. Clearly people use it for portraits. And I don't recall many reviews saying its focal length is 'useless'. They seemed to say that it's 'unusual', which it is. At the end of the day it's a preference thing and all about how you use your tools, and you might not see it as a portrait lens but there are people who do, and use it for that and more. You can't prove me wrong there.

yes and there are people who shoot portraits with fish eye lenses or 300mm fov . It is a minority though . so no it is not just a preference thing . distance to the subject also changes with fov , making it more or less usable for certain uses

and by the way , this is pretty much what the OP is saying too ..in case you want to pick on someone else LOL

Harold

Raist3d wrote:

[]

in terms of IQ, yes . Never said otherwise

. To say that Olympus calling it a portrait lens is a joke strongly invites the thought of a misunderstanding of the kind of tool this lens is.

I read this twice and have honestly no idea what this sentence means 🧐

Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

There have been and still are more than people might think.

MANUAL FOCUS FILM ERA

Pentax had three consecutive 150mm lenses in the f/4 to f/3.5 range, from the M42 era onward to the M series of K-mount lenses.

Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and five others had 75-150mm zooms in the f/3.5 to f/4.5 range.

DIGITAL ERA

Olympus offers a 75-300mm slow zoom for M4/3.

Sony offers an 18-105mm lens for crop-sensor E mount.

Sigma has the APS-C 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM with a full-frame equivalent range of 75-150mm.

Sigma had the full-frame 150mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM OS APO macro lens for a while.

Nikon used to offer an 18-105mm DX lens.

It's not a major brand, but Samyang offers a 100mm lens for APS-C.

Irix has a 150mm f/2.8 macro in both regular and cine versions.

NFE wrote:

Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

There have been and still are more than people might think.

MANUAL FOCUS FILM ERA

Pentax had three consecutive 150mm lenses in the f/4 to f/3.5 range, from the M42 era onward to the M series of K-mount lenses.

Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and five others had 75-150mm zooms in the f/3.5 to f/4.5 range.

anything more recent than a quarter of a century ?:-O

DIGITAL ERA

Olympus offers a 75-300mm slow zoom for M4/3.

Sony offers an 18-105mm lens for crop-sensor E mount.

Sigma has the APS-C 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM with a full-frame equivalent range of 75-150mm.

Sigma had the full-frame 150mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM OS APO macro lens for a while.

Nikon used to offer an 18-105mm DX lens.

This one is really hilarious . :-D. You are counting the zooms which have a 150mm fov somewhere on their range LOL .

Harold

Harold66 wrote:

NFE wrote:

Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

There have been and still are more than people might think.

MANUAL FOCUS FILM ERA

Pentax had three consecutive 150mm lenses in the f/4 to f/3.5 range, from the M42 era onward to the M series of K-mount lenses.

Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and five others had 75-150mm zooms in the f/3.5 to f/4.5 range.

anything more recent than a quarter of a century ?:-O

My point here is that lenses of this effective focal length are not a flash in the pan.  They have been periodically offered by a number of manufacturers and commercially successful for a long time.  And yes, you know very well that I listed more recent lenses below.  So why did you make this comment?

DIGITAL ERA

Olympus offers a 75-300mm slow zoom for M4/3.

Sony offers an 18-105mm lens for crop-sensor E mount.

Sigma has the APS-C 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM with a full-frame equivalent range of 75-150mm.

Sigma had the full-frame 150mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM OS APO macro lens for a while.

Nikon used to offer an 18-105mm DX lens.

This one is really hilarious . :-D. You are counting the zooms which have a 150mm fov somewhere on their range LOL .

Harold

I only counted lenses where a 150mm-equivalent FOV is at one END of the focal length range, not somewhere in the middle. Again, this is obvious to anyone reading the post.

NFE wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

NFE wrote:

Look at the main brands and check how many of them have a 150mm FOV equivalent . LOL

Harold

There have been and still are more than people might think.

MANUAL FOCUS FILM ERA

Pentax had three consecutive 150mm lenses in the f/4 to f/3.5 range, from the M42 era onward to the M series of K-mount lenses.

Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and five others had 75-150mm zooms in the f/3.5 to f/4.5 range.

anything more recent than a quarter of a century ?:-O

My point here is that lenses of this effective focal length are not a flash in the pan. They have been periodically offered by a number of manufacturers and commercially successful for a long time. And yes, you know very well that I listed more recent lenses below. So why did you make this comment?

DIGITAL ERA

Olympus offers a 75-300mm slow zoom for M4/3.

Sony offers an 18-105mm lens for crop-sensor E mount.

Sigma has the APS-C 50-100mm f/1.8 DC HSM with a full-frame equivalent range of 75-150mm.

Sigma had the full-frame 150mm f/2.8 EX DG IF HSM OS APO macro lens for a while.

Nikon used to offer an 18-105mm DX lens.

This one is really hilarious . :-D. You are counting the zooms which have a 150mm fov somewhere on their range LOL .

Harold

I only counted lenses where a 150mm-equivalent FOV is at one END of the focal length range, not somewhere in the middle.

Oops Indeed you did . I missed that 

But that does not change my point that there are currently no major brand which has a 150mm AF lens for portrait or anything else

"It does not replace a full frame 135mm lens, it's even longer (150mm equivalent)."

It does replace a ff 135mm lens. Sure it's a little bit longer but it serves for exactly the same purposes.

Harold66 wrote:

TN Args wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

Bought it because I was told a 2x converter was coming

Ouch, beginner mistake.

Really ? how do you know the circumstances ?

Well, that makes twice, now, that you have chosen to omit the circumstances, so you are the one making the circumstances irrelevant by choice. Trying to have your cake and eat it too won’t wash, BTW.

as you said , this is a specific focal length and not very useful imo

LOL, ridiculous.

really ? do you think this is a popular focal length ?

The focal length itself is hugely popular and millions of people shoot near 150mm an awful lot, but prime lenses in the 135-150mm-e range have largely been superseded by zoom lenses in the manufacturers’ catalogs. And that’s fine. But it doesn’t mean that shooting at that focal length is unpopular. It’s very useful, very practical, and very popular. Choosing to buy and use a prime instead of a zoom will always be a minority choice.

the just check how many 150mm fixed lenses you have with the other brands

135mm is near enough, explained below. Superseded in the main by zooms, explained above. QED.

I remember Olympus calling it a portrait lens which I think is a joke . unless you limit yourself to head and shoulders , this lens is kind of useless for most portrait uses , especially indoors

Good grief. 135mm f/2 prime lenses are routinely described as portrait lenses.

135mm was indeed a popular lens in the FILM days but today not so much . again check it out .. and 150mm is different than 135mm in case you did not notice

Oh what I notice is your attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill (135 is not 150, LOL) so you can point-score. This lens  would not have been hugely different if it had been 68mm instead of 75mm.

That’s like saying 50mm lenses are universally fantastic and 55mm lenses are unpopular, specialist and ‘not very useful’. LOL

Being able to argue endlessly a wrong position actually reflects badly, not the opposite, on you. Just let it go.

To any more-open-minded readers of this thread, here is a showcase image thread dedicated to this lens. https://www.mu-43.com/threads/olympus-75mm-f-1-8.28511/ . 198 pages long, and sadly I don’t think there is one single portrait, since it is obviously not suited to the job. Oh wait, maybe one or two. Thousand. And also, despite its 150mm-e being apparently “very specific, and not very useful”, you will see in the above thread a wide range of applications of this lens, in real life by real people, including portraits, sport, nature, street and landscape. Who woulda thought?

I had the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 for about a month maybe less, until I decided that the 75mm would be a much more intriguing option.  I can remember turning the zoom on the Panny and looking at the numbers climb from 35, to 50, to 75, to 100.  And i remmeber thinking to myself that the difference between each quarter of the range was seemingly only  a matter of walking a few feet backward or forward, given the right setting.

That's been the biggest challenge in a post-covid world.  I bought it in February hoping to use it at banquet halls, larger indoor spaces, events and outdoors which in that context I pretty much would only use it in spring/summer.

All that being said, I also own the 45mm f/1.2, and I find that lens to be far and away superior in terms of autofocus speed and reliability.

in terms of character, thats largely subjective, but there have been alot of moments where I thought to myself that the 75mm is definately the more traditional looking lens option compared to the more clinical rendering of the Pro line, although in the right setting, the "feathered bokeh" / f/1.2 of the pro's are really a marvel.

Fully agreed on the 45mm being easier to use indoors, which is the lens I opt to use vast majority of the time.

To that point, I've felt the temptation alot of the time to sell my 45mm AND my 75mm, and get the Sigma f/1.4 56mm to meet in the middle.

But having said that, having the 75mm even once in a while for the right setting is too tempting.  I love using it as a psuedo-zoom when i'm outdoors, and god willing theres space, its actually my favourite portrait lens of all.

TN Args wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

TN Args wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

Bought it because I was told a 2x converter was coming

Ouch, beginner mistake.

Really ? how do you know the circumstances ?

Well, that makes twice, now, that you have chosen to omit the circumstances, so you are the one making the circumstances irrelevant by choice. Trying to have your cake and eat it too won’t wash, BTW.

I know you like to pick on my posts and this is evidence of it and has not much to do with my point

as you said , this is a specific focal length and not very useful imo

LOL, ridiculous.

really ? do you think this is a popular focal length ?

The focal length itself is hugely popular and millions of people shoot near 150mm an awful lot,

yeah sure , pure speculation on your part

but prime lenses in the 135-150mm-e range have largely been superseded by zoom lenses in the manufacturers’ catalogs. And that’s fine.

But it doesn’t mean that shooting at that focal length is unpopular. It’s very useful, very practical, and very popular.

amazing how you are commenting without looking at the facts . When is focal length is as popular as you pretend , it means that main companies are going to propose that focal length . And yet very few do

Choosing to buy and use a prime instead of a zoom will always be a minority choice.

the just check how many 150mm fixed lenses you have with the other brands

135mm is near enough, explained below.

I fail to see how it is explained but regardless there are not that many 135mm fov equivalent in digital AF prime lenses either

I remember Olympus calling it a portrait lens which I think is a joke . unless you limit yourself to head and shoulders , this lens is kind of useless for most portrait uses , especially indoors

Good grief. 135mm f/2 prime lenses are routinely described as portrait lenses.

135mm was indeed a popular lens in the FILM days but today not so much . again check it out .. and 150mm is different than 135mm in case you did not notice

Oh what I notice is your attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill (135 is not 150, LOL) so you can point-score. This lens would not have been hugely different if it had been 68mm instead of 75mm.

see above . maybe that s why we don t have single primes of 68mm either LOL

Being able to argue endlessly a wrong position actually reflects badly, not the opposite, on you. Just let it go.

I have the right to express my opinion even if it bothers you

To any more-open-minded readers of this thread, here is a showcase image thread dedicated to this lens. https://www.mu-43.com/threads/olympus-75mm-f-1-8.28511/ . 198 pages long, and sadly I don’t think there is one single portrait, since it is obviously not suited to the job. Oh wait, maybe one or two. Thousand. And also, despite its 150mm-e being apparently “very specific, and not very useful”, you will see in the above thread a wide range of applications of this lens, in real life by real people, including portraits, sport, nature, street and landscape. Who woulda thought?

I never said it could not be used for any subject . I said that this is not really a portrait lens as most people understand the terms portrait . For other subjects ,it may have its specific interest for SOME sports but , for a MAJORITY of photographers , this fov does not justify to carry a specific prime in their bag. You are free to disagree but looking at other brands prove that I am not a minority in this thought

We can argue back and forth but ,at the end of the day , the question can be asked like this

If one was to be asked by a friend which lens and FOV he would recommend for portrait for someone who only wants ONE lens for portrait , would he recommend the 75mm lens ?

I am quite convinced that almost every photographer would recommend a FOV between say 80mm to 105mm

Case in point . Looking at the lens line up from both m4/3 camera companies . There is the Olympus 75mm "portrait lens" (LMAOTF)  by itself in the 135mm to 150mm  category and in the 85 to 90mm field  there is wait .. FOUR different lenses between the two manufacturers (five even if you count the PL 45mm macro lens )

Facts have a pesky way to get into the conversation with posters who cling onto their biases .. or grudges 

Harold