Does anyone use either an Oly E-M5 or E-M1 with the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ?

It's me again. 

Does anyone use/have used the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ with the original E-M5 or E-M1?

Also, what do you think about the lens's with either body's weatherproofing? It claims to be weatherproof, as do the E-M5 and E-M1 (both originals), which is a big draw.

-

Thanks.

Skeeterbytes wrote:

I had the E-M5+12-50 kit, as first released. Gave it to the kid, who still uses it. It's definitely weathersealed.

Ten years on, it could be that wear and age have affected o-rings and such, so I'd at least carefully inspect visible seals before plowing out into a monsoon.

E-M1 is also sealed.

Cheers,

Rick

Wow... nothing like a visual demonstration.

Thanks very much for the input.

Dunlin wrote:

It's me again.

Does anyone use/have used the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ with the original E-M5 or E-M1?

Also, what do you think about the lens's with either body's weatherproofing? It claims to be weatherproof, as do the E-M5 and E-M1 (both originals), which is a big draw.

I haven't used the Olympus 12-50mm since 2019.  I did use it since I got the E-m5 mark I kit that included the lens in 2014.

I primarily used the lens with the E-m5 mark I camera, but I did use it a few times with the E-m1 mark I, E-m10 mark IV, and E-P2 cameras.

Since I got a used copy of the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, I haven't used the 12-50mm as much.  My primary use of the 12-50mm lens was attached to my E-m5 mark I that is embedded within my various steampunk camera boxes over the years.  These various boxes are adorned with bellows and such that harken back to large format cameras of the late 19th century.  I ultimately replaced the lens in my steampunk camera setup because I needed a faster lens (for indoor usage) that was still splash resistant.  But when I did use it, it was a decent lens.

Given my main use of the 12-50mm has been mounted on my steampunk camera, several of the outdoor events have been rained on, including a few times when we really got drenched.  So it has been proved itself in wet weather.

However, since the lens was likely made quite a few years ago, whether the rubber O-rings that are the primary weather sealing method are still holding up might be an issue.

The 12-50mm lens does have some specific features that can be useful depending on your needs:

• It is an internal zoom lens, which means it doesn't extend or contract.  This is very useful in my steampunk camera setups where I don't have to deal with the lens changing size;
• If you use the lens on a camera with wifi support (i.e. not the original E-m5 mark I, but the E-m1 mark I and cameras after that), you can remotely zoom the lens using the wifi camera controls from a smartphone.  There are only 4 lens in the Olympus/OM/Panasonic pantheon that support electronic zoom needed to control the zoom from the wifi app.
• The electronic zoom can be a steadier zoom while recording video than the normal manual zoom.  On the other hand, a lot of people don't seem to like electronic zooms.
• The lens has a near-macro mode that can be useful for photographic close up items.  Sure a dedicated macro lens will be even better for these things, but as a jack of all trades lens, it is useful to have the capability.

Michael Meissner wrote:

Dunlin wrote:

It's me again.

Does anyone use/have used the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ with the original E-M5 or E-M1?

Also, what do you think about the lens's with either body's weatherproofing? It claims to be weatherproof, as do the E-M5 and E-M1 (both originals), which is a big draw.

I haven't used the Olympus 12-50mm since 2019. I did use it since I got the E-m5 mark I kit that included the lens in 2014.

I primarily used the lens with the E-m5 mark I camera, but I did use it a few times with the E-m1 mark I, E-m10 mark IV, and E-P2 cameras.

Since I got a used copy of the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, I haven't used the 12-50mm as much. My primary use of the 12-50mm lens was attached to my E-m5 mark I that is embedded within my various steampunk camera boxes over the years. These various boxes are adorned with bellows and such that harken back to large format cameras of the late 19th century. I ultimately replaced the lens in my steampunk camera setup because I needed a faster lens (for indoor usage) that was still splash resistant. But when I did use it, it was a decent lens.

Given my main use of the 12-50mm has been mounted on my steampunk camera, several of the outdoor events have been rained on, including a few times when we really got drenched. So it has been proved itself in wet weather.

However, since the lens was likely made quite a few years ago, whether the rubber O-rings that are the primary weather sealing method are still holding up might be an issue.

The 12-50mm lens does have some specific features that can be useful depending on your needs:

• It is an internal zoom lens, which means it doesn't extend or contract. This is very useful in my steampunk camera setups where I don't have to deal with the lens changing size;
• If you use the lens on a camera with wifi support (i.e. not the original E-m5 mark I, but the E-m1 mark I and cameras after that), you can remotely zoom the lens using the wifi camera controls from a smartphone. There are only 4 lens in the Olympus/OM/Panasonic pantheon that support electronic zoom needed to control the zoom from the wifi app.
• The electronic zoom can be a steadier zoom while recording video than the normal manual zoom. On the other hand, a lot of people don't seem to like electronic zooms.
• The lens has a near-macro mode that can be useful for photographic close up items. Sure a dedicated macro lens will be even better for these things, but as a jack of all trades lens, it is useful to have the capability.

Thanks for the info.

How would I tell if the weatherproofing was likely damaged?

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Dunlin wrote:

Thanks for the info.

How would I tell if the weatherproofing was likely damaged?

Only one you can see is the lens flange o-ring, which you can inspect for nicks or cracking.

Because it's internal zoom, there is no "tromboning" segment extending while zooming, eliminating one point of entry. There is the L-Fn button and the zoom and focus rings.

I have older sealed Oly lenses that are still fine, so would not be too concerned about the 12-50 as long as it's been treated decently.

It did not come with a hood, but JJC and other makers sell compatible ones.

Cheers,

Rick

Thanks Rick.

Dunlin wrote:

Thanks for the info.

How would I tell if the weatherproofing was likely damaged?

No idea, other than a visual inspection.  With any gear you buy used, you never know what kind of use or abuse the previous shooter subjected the gear to.

Over the years, the only lens that I had an issue with sealing is the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens.  So, I just don't count my two splash resistant Panasonic lenses (100-300mm and 35-100mm f/2.8) as really being up to Olympus/OM standards.

I still use the 12-50 mostly for storms, slide copying and video. As Michael has pointed out it has several useful features. I still use it for outdoor hiking on stormy days with both my E-M5 I and II. It's my only weather proof lens. It got submerged in a swamp and then washed off in a lake with no problems.

There were some image quality issues with the first production runs. I've played with 5 separate 12-50 lenses. Two were a bit softer than the other three. Fortunately mine was one of the good ones.

Dick

Dunlin wrote:

It's me again.

Does anyone use/have used the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ with the original E-M5 or E-M1?

I've used my 12-50mm lens with both my EM1 and EM5, and I can tell you from personal experience that it isn't a bad lens. It has a very useful focal length, it has a nice MF/AF focus clutch. and it has a very slick macro mode switch. Just remember that this is a kit lens so it isn't very fast, and it isn't the best lens Olympus ever made. But for the price (especially if you buy it used) it is a real bargain.

I stopped using it only because I bought a 12-40mm PRO lens, which is a much better lens, and a 12-32mm lens which is much smaller and more compact. So this excellent kit lens sits on my shelf collecting dust now. Which seems like a real pity.

Also, what do you think about the lens's with either body's weatherproofing? It claims to be weatherproof, as do the E-M5 and E-M1 (both originals), which is a big draw.

Just from my own experience, I have used the lens with both bodies in wet conditions and have never had a problem at all.  But remember, this is just my experience, and the sample size is pretty small (2 bodies, 1 lens, 1 user). To get a real picture you need to do comprehensive testing under extremely difficult conditions.

Also remember that this is a kit lens, and most of those aren't weather sealed at all. I would be shocked it the sealing was as good as the sealing on PRO lenses, but it might be. I just cannot say with any certainty one way or the other. In any case, if you buy one used for around $150-$200 and don't need a fast lens, then you got a pretty good deal.

I think this lens gets a bad rap because there are much better normal zoom lenses, but they sell for 3 or 4 times more. That and the plastic build turns a lot of people off.  But it is a very useful lens, and I would still be using it if I didn't have the 12-40mm lens.

-

Thanks.

Marty4650 wrote:

Dunlin wrote:

It's me again.

Does anyone use/have used the Olympus 12-50mm f/3.5-6.3 EZ with the original E-M5 or E-M1?

I've used my 12-50mm lens with both my EM1 and EM5, and I can tell you from personal experience that it isn't a bad lens. It has a very useful focal length, it has a nice MF/AF focus clutch. and it has a very slick macro mode switch. Just remember that this is a kit lens so it isn't very fast, and it isn't the best lens Olympus ever made. But for the price (especially if you buy it used) it is a real bargain.

I stopped using it only because I bought a 12-40mm PRO lens, which is a much better lens, and a 12-32mm lens which is much smaller and more compact. So this excellent kit lens sits on my shelf collecting dust now. Which seems like a real pity.

Also, what do you think about the lens's with either body's weatherproofing? It claims to be weatherproof, as do the E-M5 and E-M1 (both originals), which is a big draw.

Just from my own experience, I have used the lens with both bodies in wet conditions and have never had a problem at all. But remember, this is just my experience, and the sample size is pretty small (2 bodies, 1 lens, 1 user). To get a real picture you need to do comprehensive testing under extremely difficult conditions.

Also remember that this is a kit lens, and most of those aren't weather sealed at all. I would be shocked it the sealing was as good as the sealing on PRO lenses, but it might be. I just cannot say with any certainty one way or the other. In any case, if you buy one used for around $150-$200 and don't need a fast lens, then you got a pretty good deal.

I think this lens gets a bad rap because there are much better normal zoom lenses, but they sell for 3 or 4 times more. That and the plastic build turns a lot of people off. But it is a very useful lens, and I would still be using it if I didn't have the 12-40mm lens.

-

Thanks.

Thanks for your experience.

lolopasstrail wrote:

Used the EM-5 and that lens on a multi-day hike along Hadrian's Wall across northern England. Much rain, functioned fine.

Used it also on multi-day trek to Machu Picchu, fine rain ongoing. Functioned fine.

Used it a few days horse riding the Colorado mountains, occasional rain. Functioned fine.

I tucked it inside my parka when not in use, but also did not baby it when taking it out to use. I was very pleased with the results.

Good to hear.

Michael Meissner wrote:

......

Over the years, the only lens that I had an issue with sealing is the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens. So, I just don't count my two splash resistant Panasonic lenses (100-300mm and 35-100mm f/2.8) as really being up to Olympus/OM standards.

As I'm currently considering an offer on a used Pana 100-300 mark II lens as a weather resistant alternative to my Oly 75-300, I would be very interested to hear more details about the issues you have experienced.

EspE1 wrote:

Michael Meissner wrote:

......

Over the years, the only lens that I had an issue with sealing is the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens. So, I just don't count my two splash resistant Panasonic lenses (100-300mm and 35-100mm f/2.8) as really being up to Olympus/OM standards.

As I'm currently considering an offer on a used Pana 100-300 mark II lens as a weather resistant alternative to my Oly 75-300, I would be very interested to hear more details about the issues you have experienced.

I bought the lens used from my brick & mortar store (Hunts Photo & Video in Melrose, MA) in 2017. The next day I went on a whale watch in the Atlantic ocean.

I carried with me an Olympus E-m1 mark I with the Olympus 14-150mm mark II f/4-5.6 lens and my Panasonic G85 with the used Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens f/4-5.6. I specifically did not mix the lenses and bodies, since people have mentioned that the rubber seals are slightly different sizes between Olympus and Panasonic cameras.

While the big boat (Privateer IV from https://www.7seaswhalewatch.com/) that we use for doing whale watches in the Altantic is typically high enough that we don't get splashed, I did get one or two splashes from the ocean on this trip. Note, both cameras had been subjected to splashes at least twice before that on other whale watches.  Likewise the 14-150mm lens had been splashed in the past.  Since it was new to me, the 100-300mm had not been splashed before.

When we got back to the car, I did my usual cleaning protocol. I carry a jug of distilled water (that I typically use in my Bipap machine for sleep apnea) and a towel. I rinse the camera and lens off in the parking lot, and dry them off before heading off to supper and then driving home. I zoom the lens in/out as I rinse it to try and remove all of the salt.

When I got home, the Olympus E-m1 mark I was fine. The Olympus 14-150mm mark II was fine. The Panasonic G85 was fine. But the Panasonic 100-300mm did not turn on. You could hear a slight grinding noise when the camera attempted to reposition the gears. I played mix and match, trying other lenses on both camera bodies (no issue), and trying both lenses on other bodies (14-150mm ok, 100-300mm was not ok).

Then I tried the rice method with taking uncooked rice, and sealing the lens in the rice for several days for the rice to absorb any liquid. It still did not work.

Finally in desperation, I hit the lens on a table, and then it worked after that. I postulate that a grain of salt got in the gears, and rapping the lens freed it up. Because it was in the gears, the body sensed that the gears were stuck and turned off the camera.

Since then the 100-300mm has worked fine, but due to weight I don't shoot with it that often. I did use it a few times this year (2022).

The 14-150mm lens was used continuously after that until I upgraded to the Olympus 12-200mm lens in 2020, though I've used it a few times since getting the 12-200mm.

When I used it the G85 has continued to perform well. I don't like the Panasonic way of doing things, and as I got first the E-m10 mark II and later the E-m5 mark III, I stopped using the G85 for anything but video. The G85 has an OLED viewfinder, which is easier to see with polarized sunglasses. The E-m10 mark II and E-m5 mark III also have OLED viewfinders, which tended to be the main reason I shot stills with the G85 in the later days.

The E-m1 mostly worked after that, but I did have two times when I had to send it in for servicing. The first time was to fix a sticky shutter in 2018 (which I don't think were caused by the wave splash). I did have to send it in a second time in 2019 where the USB and shutter release ports stopped working. It is possible that the salt from that wave splash in 2017 caused the problem, but the camera has been the subject of a few other splashes before and after 2017, so I doubt it.

I did take both the G85 and E-m1 along with my 2 normal splash resistant lenses (Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and Olympus 14-150mm mark II f/4-5.6) to Niagara Falls in 2018, where I took both cameras/lenses on the boat ride on the river where you get splashed for over 10 minutes.

Thanks for the orientation!

Michael Meissner wrote:

EspE1 wrote:

Michael Meissner wrote:

......

Over the years, the only lens that I had an issue with sealing is the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens. So, I just don't count my two splash resistant Panasonic lenses (100-300mm and 35-100mm f/2.8) as really being up to Olympus/OM standards.

As I'm currently considering an offer on a used Pana 100-300 mark II lens as a weather resistant alternative to my Oly 75-300, I would be very interested to hear more details about the issues you have experienced.

I bought the lens used from my brick & mortar store (Hunts Photo & Video in Melrose, MA) in 2017. The next day I went on a whale watch in the Atlantic ocean.

I carried with me an Olympus E-m1 mark I with the Olympus 14-150mm mark II f/4-5.6 lens and my Panasonic G85 with the used Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens f/4-5.6. I specifically did not mix the lenses and bodies, since people have mentioned that the rubber seals are slightly different sizes between Olympus and Panasonic cameras.

While the big boat (Privateer IV from https://www.7seaswhalewatch.com/) that we use for doing whale watches in the Altantic is typically high enough that we don't get splashed, I did get one or two splashes from the ocean on this trip. Note, both cameras had been subjected to splashes at least twice before that on other whale watches. Likewise the 14-150mm lens had been splashed in the past. Since it was new to me, the 100-300mm had not been splashed before.

When we got back to the car, I did my usual cleaning protocol. I carry a jug of distilled water (that I typically use in my Bipap machine for sleep apnea) and a towel. I rinse the camera and lens off in the parking lot, and dry them off before heading off to supper and then driving home. I zoom the lens in/out as I rinse it to try and remove all of the salt.

When I got home, the Olympus E-m1 mark I was fine. The Olympus 14-150mm mark II was fine. The Panasonic G85 was fine. But the Panasonic 100-300mm did not turn on. You could hear a slight grinding noise when the camera attempted to reposition the gears. I played mix and match, trying other lenses on both camera bodies (no issue), and trying both lenses on other bodies (14-150mm ok, 100-300mm was not ok).

Then I tried the rice method with taking uncooked rice, and sealing the lens in the rice for several days for the rice to absorb any liquid. It still did not work.

Finally in desperation, I hit the lens on a table, and then it worked after that. I postulate that a grain of salt got in the gears, and rapping the lens freed it up. Because it was in the gears, the body sensed that the gears were stuck and turned off the camera.

Since then the 100-300mm has worked fine, but due to weight I don't shoot with it that often. I did use it a few times this year (2022).

The 14-150mm lens was used continuously after that until I upgraded to the Olympus 12-200mm lens in 2020, though I've used it a few times since getting the 12-200mm.

When I used it the G85 has continued to perform well. I don't like the Panasonic way of doing things, and as I got first the E-m10 mark II and later the E-m5 mark III, I stopped using the G85 for anything but video. The G85 has an OLED viewfinder, which is easier to see with polarized sunglasses. The E-m10 mark II and E-m5 mark III also have OLED viewfinders, which tended to be the main reason I shot stills with the G85 in the later days.

The E-m1 mostly worked after that, but I did have two times when I had to send it in for servicing. The first time was to fix a sticky shutter in 2018 (which I don't think were caused by the wave splash). I did have to send it in a second time in 2019 where the USB and shutter release ports stopped working. It is possible that the salt from that wave splash in 2017 caused the problem, but the camera has been the subject of a few other splashes before and after 2017, so I doubt it.

I did take both the G85 and E-m1 along with my 2 normal splash resistant lenses (Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and Olympus 14-150mm mark II f/4-5.6) to Niagara Falls in 2018, where I took both cameras/lenses on the boat ride on the river where you get splashed for over 10 minutes.

So you'd recommend the 75-300 II lens over the 100-300 II lens on the EM10 Mark 2, Mike? I saw the Oly lens does better on resolution tests too.

Also how do you like the 12-200 lens on that camera? Is it better than the 14-150 II lens in terms of resolution and image quality?

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

So you'd recommend the 75-300 II lens over the 100-300 II lens on the EM10 Mark 2, Mike? I saw the Oly lens does better on resolution tests too.

I've never used the 75-300 mark II lens, so I can't say. I did buy the lens in part due to it being splash resistant (and in part because my brick and mortar store had it on sale at a good price). From the reviews, if you are buying it used, you want to make sure you get the mark II version of the 75-300mm.

If you are shooting with Panasonic cameras and not Olympus cameras, then the 100-300mm might win out since it works with the DFD system used by Panasonic and the newer bodies sensor shift stabilization will work with the lens' stabilization.

Also how do you like the 12-200 lens on that camera? Is it better than the 14-150 II lens in terms of resolution and image quality?

I am not as picky as some people are. For me, the photos with it are good enough to use. I rarely 'compose' shots, but instead use the camera to capture decisive moments. While I certainly use the extra 151-200mm range with the 12-200mm lens, I find having the 12-13mm range in the lens is also very helpful. With the 14-150mm lens, I would find at times needing to switch to the 12-40mm lens just to get the 12-13mm range.

Since I bought the 12-200mm in 2020, I've used the 14-150mm mark II 45 times, and the 12-200mm over 1,600 times. In fact, in the last two years, I've used the 12-200mm more than the 12-40mm f/2.8. Before 2020, the 12-40mm tended to be my go to lens.

So for me, it is a winner. However, if you are on a tighter budget, only you can say whether it is worth the extra cost to get the extra range.

In addition, it is a larger and heavier lens. I find with my thinner E-m5 mark III body and the third party grip, the 12-200mm is just on the cusp of being too heavy for single handed shooting. On the OM-1 with its deeper hand grip, the 12-200mm balances nicely.

Michael Meissner wrote:

OutsideTheMatrix wrote:

So you'd recommend the 75-300 II lens over the 100-300 II lens on the EM10 Mark 2, Mike? I saw the Oly lens does better on resolution tests too.

I've never used the 75-300 mark II lens, so I can't say. I did buy the lens in part due to it being splash resistant (and in part because my brick and mortar store had it on sale at a good price). From the reviews, if you are buying it used, you want to make sure you get the mark II version of the 75-300mm.

If you are shooting with Panasonic cameras and not Olympus cameras, then the 100-300mm might win out since it works with the DFD system used by Panasonic and the newer bodies sensor shift stabilization will work with the lens' stabilization.

Also how do you like the 12-200 lens on that camera? Is it better than the 14-150 II lens in terms of resolution and image quality?

I am not as picky as some people are. For me, the photos with it are good enough to use. I rarely 'compose' shots, but instead use the camera to capture decisive moments. While I certainly use the extra 151-200mm range with the 12-200mm lens, I find having the 12-13mm range in the lens is also very helpful. With the 14-150mm lens, I would find at times needing to switch to the 12-40mm lens just to get the 12-13mm range.

Since I bought the 12-200mm in 2020, I've used the 14-150mm mark II 45 times, and the 12-200mm over 1,600 times. In fact, in the last two years, I've used the 12-200mm more than the 12-40mm f/2.8. Before 2020, the 12-40mm tended to be my go to lens.

So for me, it is a winner. However, if you are on a tighter budget, only you can say whether it is worth the extra cost to get the extra range.

In addition, it is a larger and heavier lens. I find with my thinner E-m5 mark III body and the third party grip, the 12-200mm is just on the cusp of being too heavy for single handed shooting. On the OM-1 with its deeper hand grip, the 12-200mm balances nicely.

I'm hoping its image quality is nice all the way to 200mm.  I'm getting the grip for the EM10 Mk2 so hopefully it will balance well for me.

f/6.3 is a little slow on the tele end but it's pretty close to the 75-300mm in that respect.

Example shot. It's a kit lens so don't expect fireworks but it's great when you know you are going to get splashed and it's not safe to change lenses.

Whale watching with 12-50. Kaikoura, NZ.