Full Olympus 75mm f/1.8 review at ePhotozine.

Share

On left the Olympus lens, on right the Zeiss Biotar 75mm f/1.5.

ePhotozine posted the full Olympus 75mm f/1.8 review. And it’s not a surprise that this lens gets another big appraisal: “It’s amongst the sharpest lenses currently available for any camera system, it’s well built and a pleasure to use. The price is actually quite good value when such high optical performance is delivered. It can certainly give the Zeiss’ and Leica’s a run for their money.

The only real downside for them is that it is not weather sealed and that you have to pay extra for the original hood. At least some third party hoods are already made on sold in US ($7 on amazon), US ($32 better quality), Germany (ebay) and Hong Kong (ebay).

The lens itself can be found at Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay.

Olympus Lens alternatives (if you don’t care about the missing autofocus and electronic contacts):
1) Dallmeyer 75mm f/1.9 (Here on eBay). This is an extremely expensive lens and I don’t know why it is so. Only crazy guys would buy that :)
2) Leica Summilux 75mm f/1.4 (Here on eBay). Extraordinary high quality lens for an extraordinary price (although it’s still less expensive than the mysterious Dallmeyer). It’s the fastest of all 75mm lenses
3) Zeiss Biotar 75mm f/1.5 (Here on eBay). Fast and also a bit exotic lens made for the Exacta series.
4) Leica Summarit 75mm f/2.5 (Here on eBay). High quality and relatively compact lens. A bit slow compared to the Olympus (f/2.5).
5) Voigtlander Heliar 75mm f/1.8 (Here on eBay). Probably the best alternative of the new Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens. Same aperture, superb high quality and cheaper.
6) Fujinon 75mm f/1.8 (Here on eBay). This is a very cheap TV lens and I don’t expect the quality to be very good. I wouldn’t buy that unlike your really need that focal length and you have a very low budget.

Share
  • Tom

    Hi!

    Does anyone know when Olympus are releasing the 75 in black?

    • Incessant Troll

      whenever the engineers figure out how they can make a $1 change and charge customers $300 for it if the performance is there.

      • Ronan

        Nothing to do with the engineers but with the accountants 😉

        • QBNY

          You mean the Yakuza on the Board gives the O.K.

          • Ronan

            You really shouldn’t believe what you read on the internet.

            • QBNY

              I was being sarcastic, really, But you know what I meant… If you didn’t:

              On Dec. 11, Japanese prosecutors raided Kikukawa’s home as well as Olympus headquarters. A month later, Olympus sued 19 current and former executives, including Kikukawa and a dozen board members, seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages. Also in January, the Tokyo Stock Exchange fined the company 10 million yen ($1.27 million) for “falsifying financial records to conceal losses.”

              -Taken from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-02-16/the-story-behind-the-olympus-scandal#p1

              It’s a good read.

              Hmm… Falsifying financial records… Maybe that’s why they charge so much for hoods and Black Lenses that they should have done in the first place… They’re trying to recoup.

              • Mymaco on Instagram

                True, that was a shame on those criminal. And it’s a shame the hood must be bought separately for these primes. The price for this 75mm is not a shame, considered the awesome quality of the lens (yes I own it). Charging 300 $ for a black coat? I laugh at it: it’s simply smart. I would do it myself, if people would complain about their difficulties in taking street photos with a silver lens. Shame on them, in this case.

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/squeegee/ squeegee

      I wonder, do other lens manufactuers go through this too? I don’t pay attention to many forms.

      Like do Canon users demand the USM lenses in black? (or are they already available in multiple colours?)

      What about Leica lenses? I’ve seen some silver and some black, are they available in both or does leica just tell them you get what you get?

      Personally, I want my camera and lens’ in lime green, cyan, yellow, and magenta mixed blotches.

      • Ronan

        Most lenses come in black. Most manufacturer decide what colors they are available, and usually its 1 color.

      • Anonymous

        Lets not forget that the 75mm is not the same color as the 45mm, even though they are both supposedly “silver” – completely idiotic mistake.

        • Anonymous

          The 75 is the same color as the 12; both are metal and of higher construction quality than the 45 (which is made of plastic, I guess).

        • http://www.43rumors.com/members/squeegee/ squeegee

          As mentioned by the other poster, one is metal, the other is plastic. It will be difficult to make them the exact same colour even if they were renditions of black. One is painted the other is not. It would be like trying to make a black anodized lens the same colours as a black painted plastic lens.

          I guess maybe olympus is more interested in the optical quality rather than the asthetic beauty of the lens. Perhaps zuiko lenses aren’t a good fit for the camera vain.

          • Esa Tuunanen

            Actually anodized surface can be coloured to produce very, very closely same colour as painted surface when using properly selected dye.

            Aluminium PC cases are example of that.

  • Ranger 9

    I’ve owned the 75mm f/1.5 Zeiss Biotar (super-rare Leica screw mount version) and it is in no way an alternative to the Olympus 75/1.8. From f/1.5 to f/2.8 the Biotar is sharp only in a small circle in the center, and even there it’s very hazy and flarey. It produces a very pretty effect for romantic portraiture, but it’s not what you’d want for general photography. From f/8 on down the results are more conventionally sharp, but what’s the point of that? For general photography, hardly a substitute for the Olympus lens, which is bitingly sharp even at full aperture, and is considerably less expensive than the eBay asking prices for the Biotars. Also worth noting: the Biotar is from EAST German Zeiss, so the glass is nice but the focusing mount and barrel are nasty aluminum that doesn’t hold up well.

    Likewise, the Voigtlander 75/1.8 is intended as a portrait lens and is designed specifically NOT to be sharp at full aperture (this is per the official U.S. Voigtlander distributor) so again, great if that’s what you want, but not really an alternative to the Olympus lens.

    If you want to make sharp pictures at wide apertures, the Leica lenses will do it, but they all require adapters for M4/3 and all are wildly expensive, so it’s hard to see why anyone would want to buy one of them vs. the Olympus for use on an M4/3 camera.

    Incidentally, your link to the Biotar lens on eBay brings up results for the 75 Summilux and vice-versa.

    • Ulli

      I have used the Biotar’s clone, the Helios 40-2 85mm 1.5
      it was the perfect portraitlens for that moodful rendering quality, untill the 2nd hand prices went up from a mere 100 euros to 400-600. Amazingly, the lens is in production again, with hopefully lower prices then the ones at Ebay right now.

    • Mr. Reeee

      There’s also the slightly older, and sadly discontinued, Voigtländer 75mm f2.5 Color Heliar lens (Leica L39 screwmount). It’s an excellent lens. Sharp wide open, very good detail, excellent color and nice character.. I got mine new for $490 (lens hood included) back in the spring and have been extremely happy with the results.

  • smileblog

    What if they gonna make 25mm as same quality as this 75mm…

    That would be…

    • Incessant Troll

      i bet they can make it higher quality, over $1000, probably not some plebian color like silver or black, with a optional $100 lens hood made out of recycled sardine cans.

    • Thomas

      With today advanced digital technologies, major lens makers can design and make super lenses. However, the super premium optical quality always comes with high cost in design process, materials used, and assembly procedures. Sometimes, they have to think about the balance between cost and quality. Leica lens is an example for premium quality no matter how much it costs. Nikon, as another example, introduced the 1.8G prime lens lineup for the balance between cost and quality.

      Oly can do 25/1.4 with the same quality as they did for 75mm. But How much is it? Will it sell? To me, Pana 25/1.4 is more than enough for my own use.

      • Anonymous

        Complex calculations of optical design itself can be nowadays done easily with computer simulations.
        Starting to use computers for that is what made decently performing and not insanely priced zooms possible few decades ago. Until that only movie industry could afford zooms.

        But manufacturing cost of lens with more aspheric elements, more expensive special glasses and finer mechanical tolerances are simply higher.

  • Yun

    I hope the incoming 42.5 summilux can produce something similiar with this or even edge it .
    The 75mm is a magnifinient glass in my book .
    Well done !
    What is the name of the planner anyway ?

  • Starred

    Just posted on Facebook

    Once a certain number of the Micro Four Third lens lineup had been released, we started receiving more user requests for a prime telephoto lens dedicated to image quality. This lens project kicked off in response to such needs as well as our desire to develop a flagship lens. In order to achieve a look that is appropriate for its high performance, the lens comes with a metal exterior and a design with emphasis on quality.

  • All So Obvious

    I’m sorry, folks, but all this discussion sounds useless to me: why not just buy an excellent 50mm f1.4 + ring? You’ll have a perfect lens for portrays, for $60… Manual focus is not an issue for portrays, is it?

    • Anonymous

      I think there is quite a difference between a 100mm equiv and a 150mm equiv lens. The Oly 75mm is not really a portrait lens (80mm-90mm equiv), its more in the tradition of the old SLR 135mm lenses, like the popular Vivitar 135 f2.8 that was a must have lens back in the ‘old days’.

      • Anonymous

        But we who remember the “old days” know that then, a 135mm was considered the perfect portrait lens. I support Oly’s suggestion that the 75/1.8 (also) is a portrait lens! Who are you, young punks, to claim that a portrait lens by definition is a 80-90 mm? :-) If you google a little bit, you’ll find that fashion photographers even use 2-300mm lenses for portaits.

        • http://www.43rumors.com/members/squeegee/ squeegee

          You had 2 – 300mm lenses back in the day? Sweet! I can only image the angle of view of a 2mm lens :)

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

      that will never reach the performances of the 75 mm f1.8 ! If you take a FF 50 mm f1.4, you will use only the center of the glass on m43 and then you will loose resolution because the lens is not optimized to work with the pixel density of a m43 sensor…In fact m43 lenses must have a better resolution than FF lenses too reach the same final performances (RAW files) as the sensor is smaller.
      Moreover, if you use an old film lens, it is not optimized for digital sensor and has a lot of aberrations. I have a canon FD 50 mm f1.4 that I use on m43 and it is not that sharp…it starts to be sharp at around f4-5.6 and contrast is not that good whatever is the aperture…I think the 75 mm is so much better (I don’t have it) !!!

      • fsfs

        The myth about the Olympus lenses promoted by the fanboys is what empowers Olympus to charge $80 for a lens hood. If you actually look at lenses from other systems with an open mind the likes of the Nikon 85mm f1.8G lens on DX gives a AOV equivalent [sorry!} to a 127mm FF. Which is closer to the old 135mm AOV than the 150mm of the 75 f1.8. The 85mm F1.8 is excellent across the frame from wide open {link below}. So a DX user using the D7000 sensor which is already better than the E-M5 combined with .75 of a stop shallower DoF can compete very well with the E-M5 for a lot less cash.;

        http://www.photozone.de/nikon–nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/718-nikkorafs8518dx?start=1

        So apart from better build quality { though no weathersealing} what do you truly think you get for double the price , more than double if you consider Nikon includes a hood.The 85mm is already excellent wide open and remains this way throghout its range till diffraction kicks in at F11.

        Now I am a mFT user and I am buying the 75mm, it is a great lens , beautiful to look at and delivers amazing results. The problem comes with the cheapskate tactics like not providing a hood on a $900 lens , and why is it not weather sealed or will that be in the $2000 “special edition”. Just because I love mFT doesn’t mean to say I love being scalped.

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

          I agree tat the 75 mm is very expensive and it’s a shame that there is no lens hood at that price…What I’m saying is that Full Frame lenses adapted to m43 give worst results than native m43 like the oly 75 mm. I’m sure that a nikon 85 mm on APS-C gives great results but worst results on a m43 sensor…

  • Mike

    I can’t help but notice that Olympus is ripping us off here. If this 75mm lens shows anything, it is that MFT lenses are either incredible expensive to make (due to sharpness constraints), or they are incredibly overpriced.

    If the first is true, it doesn’t bode well for MFT.

    Personally, I own both MFT and Nikon DSLR systems. The sharpness on this 75mm lens is nice and all (but also a necessity on such a small sensor), but I can’t help but notice the bokeh of this expensive lens is as shitty and blown out as Nikon’s cheapo 35mm and 50mm primes. Now, one of the primary reasons for buying this type of lens is the bokeh. Grab a Nikon 85mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 and the bokeh will be incredibly creamy and beautiful.

    I’m all for an excellent, long prime for MFT… but the way things are looking now you can get far better results with a cheap 85mm on a cheap ASP-C body.

    • Simon

      The problem with your assertion is that the Olympus 75 is actually a good bit sharper based on the imatest results. You might be right for a budget proposition that the Nikon lens would be a good MF alternative, but face facts, to get sharpness off the scale like this you have to pay for it.

      • Simon

        Also note that the bokeh is far from being “sh*tty and blown out”. It’s amongst the best I’ve ever seen, and that comes from a M9 and 50 Summilux ASPH owner.

        Try this for size: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sgoldswo/7912248110/

        • Mike

          What? That example has *terrible* bokeh!

          While that sharpness is necessary to resolve the pixels on a MFT sensor, it is not so on a larger sensor.

          • Simon

            What !? back, no it doesn’t. It stands up well to bokeh from many Leica lenses I own or have owned. I guess that proves the saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

            Though if you think the bokeh from the 75mm is bad I would recommend a trip to an optician long term…

      • allant

        @Simon the problem with lens tests taken in abstract is that what really counts is the system performance. I am not suggesting the 85mm Nikon for mFT at all just pointing out that performance just as good can be had in other systems for a lot less money. Obviously lenses perform best for the system they are designed for, on FF the result of the 85mm F1.8G regarding resolution are excellent.

        The LW/PH data provided by the majority of lens test websites shows a far more reliable outlook on camera plus lens. I do not personally see any value in testing these factors in isolation as i find using my lens on my camera the best way of taking a photo lol. This is why you find that many Olympus fan boys hunt for test sites such as Lenstip which do not display their results in LW/PH as otherwise it makes their arguments rather silly. The fact is just to compete the mFT lens has to have double the resolution of a FF lens .

        I am an avid mFT user and for me it is all about size and weight on one hand compared to image quality. Sure you can get better performance sometimes a lot better in FF . But i am not prepared to carry that amount of weight and for my purpose the mFT image quality is certainly good enough .I enjoy nature photography and the most desirable upgrades in future mFT “for me” would be better AF and some long reasonably fast primes. FF gear costs more weighs more and is used by a huge percentage of the worlds pro photographers who I presume do so for good reasons. It is a little amusing for mFT users a system dominated by amateurs, to be making wild claims about other systems. I am not a pro but I imagine that most pro’s consider their gear as tools , in the way that I as a carpenter consider a hammer a tool.

        • Simon

          I might be missing something here but isn’t Line widths per picture height more of a measure of camera performance (sensor resolution) rather than lens resolution?

          I agree that the sensor performance is relevant to the overall output but it’s hardly anything to worry about with the latest generation of 16mp M43s sensors, particularly those with weak AA filters like the E-M5.

          Also, investing in a lens with a (by itself) off the scale resolving power would seem to be a good investment for the future TBH…

          • davidtu

            LW/ PH gives a far clearer picture of what the image coming from the camera/lens combination. Which is a more sensible way to test for final output. The images we create are dependent on how the system performs as a whole which , with both lens performance and sensor size and quality all playing major parts. I have also noticed a reluctance to quote the results from the sites which use LW/PH on the part of certain extreme Olympus users, as they prefer the abstraction of lens tests alone which really tell very little about the final result.

            There are several contributing factors in the relative performance of lenses from different systems . A mFT lens needs to have twice the resolution of a FF lens just to compete . There are also advanatges to be had by using a 4×3 ratio ( less extremes edges of image circle used ) , the extra DOF and so on. Almost all sites testing lenses use the LW/PH methodology and looking at the results for resolution the differences between systems are very clear.

            • Simon

              It isn’t just Lenstip, I read a quote yesterday on Photozone.de that more or less said they feel the LW/ PH measure to be meaningless and will be removing it soon…

              I do doubt your point about lens resolution equivalence by the way. On that assumption the Oly 75mm must be off the scale as it’s clearly sharper (based on anecdotal review of results from mine and others than every DSLR lens I’ve ever used and at least some of my M-mount lenses).

              • rewtt

                @ simon Lenstip is one of the very few not using LW/PH hence why it is the most quoted by Olympus fanboys in need of an ego boost. The reality is that a FF lens mounted on a FF camera will have higher resolution this is why LW/PH shows you the performance of the output image. Even to a desperate Olympus fanboy the fact that an image is made up of lens + sensor must make common sensor, why would, testing one part of the equation in isolation possibly provide more useful information. As with the other posters I am only interested in end result and I imagine most photographers feel the same.

                What Photozone says is about LW/PH is that

                ” it’s basically a unit for resolution limited by the max. Resolution of the camera”

                Which is why it is a more reliable indicator of the final output. Any other measurement tests the lens in isolation, which is meaningless as you have to put the lens on a camera.Claims about how the lens performs minus a camera , are useful how ?

                Below is a link to a test between the Olympus 50mm macro compared to the Canon 100mm macro , while neither are on the highest MP bodies . You get the idea , FF easily out resolves even the best Mft/FT lenses when you take the sensor into the equation.

                http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/widget/Fullscreen.ashx?reviews=32,32&fullscreen=true&av=2,2&fl=50,50&vis=VisualiserSharpnessMTF,VisualiserSharpnessMTF&stack=horizontal&&config=/lensreviews/widget/LensReviewConfiguration.xml%3F4

                As an example of the difference in resolution when on sensor a Nikon 50mm F1.8G on a D3X {obviously the results would be even higher on the D800 , has a peak resolution of 3958 centre at F5.6 . The Panasonic 25mm F1.4 which costs well over double the price peaks at 3075 . So to compete with the FF lens the 75mm would need to be better than the 25mm { at its peak } by aprox 30%

                http://www.photozone.de/olympus–four-thirds-lens-tests/740-pana25?start=1

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

      In factI have been laughing all the way to the bank, as they say, when I bought my Jupiter 9 85/2 for 80 EU, thus saving me from the temptation. I am sure it’s not as sharp at f/2 but it has a beautiful bokeh, colour signature and rendition.
      It’s an old Zeiss design too, perhaps a Sonnar.

      Surely at the time Russian specialised manpower was very cheap, but the same could be said of Chinese manpower today. So why can we have honest prices?

      The crunch will come when we’ll have 1500 $ FF bodies with less expensive 135mm. I predict that in a yr. or two Oly will have to offer discounts.
      Like Panny 12-35 which was way overpriced.

      • Mr. Reeee

        +10
        Sharpness isn’t everything. Neither is autofocus. Or stabilization.

        I almost got a Nikon 85mm f2 AI-S lens, until I opted for the Voigtländer 75mm f2.5. That’s also the reason I got an SLR Magic Hyperprime 12mm T1.6 over the Oly 12mm.

        There’s just something about classic lens designs that the newer lenses simply cannot match.

        • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

          Well if you have a blind trust behind you, and you are just moving money without further work, perhaps.

          If Pros are willing to buy it instead, it means that they can offset the expense in 1-3 yrs. But they are 1 to a thousand or 10,000 among those who buy m4/3 bodies. So, what gives?

          IMHO there will be a 1000 worldwide who will buy the lens, among the 100-200,000 buying m4/3 bodies. Then unless the lens is discounted by 20 or 30% it will stay in the warehouses.

          Does this make any sense or is it just Oly flaunting?

      • bart

        amalric, what do you define as honest prices?

        In a free market, prices are simply determined by what people are willing to pay, not by what it costs to make something.

        And that makes that cheap and crappy 135/2.8 lenses are plenty, but cheap and really good 135/2.8 lenses aren’t. Something like the Minolta (Sony re-issued) 135/2.8 STF has a list price of $1399 for example.

        Not to mention, a D600 with a few primes quickly gets large enough to need a serious camera bag, a mostly equivalent m4/3 kit easily fits a small shoulder bag or the pockets of a winter coat. That D600 will handle a few situations better for sure, but be less convenient, and hence less likely to always be with you. Also, its list price is twice that of an E-M5 when looking at body only. Sure, street prices are a little bit lower, but that 2x the price thing didn’t go away with that.

        Oh… and obviously there are much much cheaper m4/3 cameras, even if you want the EVF built-in. They have limitations? Well, look again at the D600, it inherits some of the typical artificial limitations of an entry-level Nikon camera.

        Can 135 format cameras be more compact then current models, even when using a classic SLR design? Most definitely, my Minolta Dynax (Maxxum for those from the USA) 5 is only marginally larger then my E-M5, when both have a ‘standard zoom’ attached. As soon as I mount a 70-200/3.5-5.6 on the Minolta, and the 35-100 (no I don’t have one, but a local shop did) on the E-M5, the difference in size has become quite significant. That will always be the issue with making the 135 format compact, it really only works for not-too-wide angle to short-tele lenses, or you either run into needing room for a retro-focal design or to facilitate the long focal lengths needed, either way things will get big. Going mirrorless solves the wide-angle side of this, but not the tele side.

        Ah, before you mention it, it would of course help to actually exploit this lens size advantage, which Olympus didn’t do very well in 4/3 for the SHG zoom lenses at least, but so far it seems both Olympus and Panasonic are on-track with this for m4/3 (just got that 14/2.5 pancake, man that thing is tiny!), and both the 75-300 (Oly) and 100-300 (Pana) aren’t overly large for their focal length and apertures.

        • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

          The markets are not free, and companies must have some kind of social responsability.

          Are you the last to know in your country, which is exporting debt and mess to the rest of the world?

          Have you ever heard of your subprimes being exported, and whole countries being blackmailed by Goldman Sachs and rating agencies as a result?

          Even in the camera world free market my foot. Having messed with 4/3 and the SHG series, Oly – not to mention its cooked free enterprise accounts – Oly had to go and beg Sony to be rescued, in order not to be sold out by banks.

          Social responsibility also means considering consumers like people, not like cows to milk.

          The proof is that m4/3 both bodies and lenses are not able to keep introduction prices for more than a few months. As for 4/3 SHG lenses they are all for sale at ebay.

          Shall we call it the best allocation of resources by a free market? LOL.

          • bart

            Sorry not going to have a political discussion here.

            Suffice to say that what people are willing to pay is what determines price, regardless of if you or I or anyone else thinks that is the right way or not.

            It is also exactly what is causing prices to drop after a while, especially for things on a one year cycle. It is also obviously what determines the prices on ebay.

            • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

              I am not either interested in discussing your buying intentions that you disguise under the ideological term of ‘free enterprise’ LOL.

              We know that Oly is losing money each year despite these prices and possibly because of them too, because in order to clear stocks they must deeply discount them, thus losing even more money.

              So what gives? Unhappy customers and an unhappy company. There goes your ‘free enterprise’. Clearly Oly and Panny are not able to reach a breakeven on introduction prices, because they have not enough customers.

              They don’t have them because there has been a double dip recession, in case you hadn’t noticed.

              And how happy you are or not really isn’t going to change one iota about their predicament, and the sorry state of demand for such expensive items.

              Sick and tired of those talking of lenses as some kind of male jewelry. I have yet to see the quality of their images – LOL.

              • bart

                So you have no argument, judging from you resorting to insults and totally inane assumptions.

                Go grow up and learn how to argue something in a somewhat normal way or just shut the fuck up.

                • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

                  Insults? What insults? The only thing that is, your not being able to carry on a debate with meaningful arguments, and resorting therefore to personal attacks.

                  I have plenty of arguments against companies which have to lower their prices drastically a few months after introduction prices.

                  And it makes me laugh to see the anger of those who buy at the latter, only to see that they are screwed a few months later. The Panny 12-35 lost 30% in a couple of months.

                  The top ranking mirrorless camera at BCN Japan has been the three yrs. old PL1, discounted by 75%.

                  There goes the insult of your free market blabber. But please feel free to buy at introduction prices. It’s nice to see noobs financing customers like me who are not the slaves of marketing -please carry on disgorging your money – LOL!

                  • bart

                    There is absolutely no point in continuing a debate on arguments with people who intentionally either ignore, misinterpret or misrepresent any arguments.

                    And yes, when someone tries to have a serious discussion with you and you resort to such tactics you are being insulting indeed.

          • Smon

            Is this really the place for this kind of political discussion? Even if it was, your posts are so pompous that they have the opposite effect to what I assume was intended.

            By the way your point below on pricing and Oly losing money is bunk. The M43s bit of the camera business is one of the few parts of Oly making money. Read the notes to their financials…

            • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

              What is wrong with politics in your country? Besides I didn’t introduce it, it was a poster mentioning ‘free market’ in the first place.

              Free market is just an idealized concept created by Adam Smith and Ricardo three centuries ago that has no bearing with the oligopolistic markets of today.

              To use it in a camera discussion is certainly a political argument against those who cannot afford luxury items for their leisure.

              Besides I read Olympus latest financial statement , and they are still losing money, confirming that they have a pricing problem.

              So you are ill informed, and yet obfuscating the issues in a typical bully’s way.

              Therefore keep off, thank you.

            • Simon

              Thank you for your thoughts, but I’m not sure someone mentioning a free market on a camera blog really counts as being political or deserves a pompous lecture on economic theory. If you really think that is a political statement then you need help.

              By the way, I meant more than look at the bottom line (since the camera business is such a tiny part of Olympus anyway) I meant the notes to the accounts in which you can see which parts of the business are profitable and which are not.

              If you don’t believe that you can look at business plan which clearly indicates that high end compact and mirrorless are highly profitable (hence becoming the future focus of investment and the camera business as a whole), DSLR and low end compact are not (and are responsible for the overall losses in the camera business).

      • Simon

        I didn’t say anything about Lenstip, so I’m not sure where that came from but your quote from Photozone is misleading.

        Actually here is what photozone says about LW/PH values
        “You shouldn’t take the LW/PH value itself too seriously because it is dependent on a number of factors. The analyzing tool (Imatest) is quite vulnerable to the quality of the source material.

        The effective resolution is dependent on a number of factors. AA filter of the sensor, A/D conversion, demosaicing, base sharpening and of course the lens resolution. However, the “front-“factors are all near-linear. Say, e.g. the AA filter has a factor 0.7 whereas the base sharpening has a factor of 1.5. So in the end we have a formula like
        EffectiveResolution = a * b * c * d * LensResolution
        Now the value of a,b,c,d is actually meaningless. You can even add another factor – say 0.5. From a qualitative perspective this doesn’t change anything. The charts will still look the same – only the numbers will be different.

        All PZ sample images are taken as RAW files and converted via Photoshop ACR (default settings without automatic image correction and contrast set to 0). If you convert RAWs via other imaging applications the LW/PH figures will be lower or higher due to the different sharpening & contrast algorithms. In the future we will probably drop the LW/PHs in favor of a school mark system which is easier to read.”

        Claims of how the lens will perform minus a camera are actually more relevant IMO because actually people change bodies and upgrade sensors over time.

        To the extent one might accept that your contention is valid, the measure becomes entirely useless when compared to the quality of the results one can obtain from the cameras in question (I.e looking at pictures rather than measurebating). This is where the 75 rides over almost every DSLR lens available and many M lenses as well. In addition “old” reviews are useless, because they don’t factor in the increased resolution of modern sensors.

      • Simon

        I didn’t say anything about Lenstip, so I’m not sure where that came from but your quote from Photozone is misleading.

        Actually here is what photozone says about LW/PH values
        “You shouldn’t take the LW/PH value itself too seriously because it is dependent on a number of factors. The analyzing tool (Imatest) is quite vulnerable to the quality of the source material.

        The effective resolution is dependent on a number of factors. AA filter of the sensor, A/D conversion, demosaicing, base sharpening and of course the lens resolution. However, the “front-”factors are all near-linear. Say, e.g. the AA filter has a factor 0.7 whereas the base sharpening has a factor of 1.5. So in the end we have a formula like
        EffectiveResolution = a * b * c * d * LensResolution
        Now the value of a,b,c,d is actually meaningless. You can even add another factor – say 0.5. From a qualitative perspective this doesn’t change anything. The charts will still look the same – only the numbers will be different.

        All PZ sample images are taken as RAW files and converted via Photoshop ACR (default settings without automatic image correction and contrast set to 0). If you convert RAWs via other imaging applications the LW/PH figures will be lower or higher due to the different sharpening & contrast algorithms. In the future we will probably drop the LW/PHs in favor of a school mark system which is easier to read.”

        Claims of how the lens will perform minus a camera are actually more relevant IMO because actually people change bodies and upgrade sensors over time.

        To the extent one might accept that your contention is valid, the measure becomes entirely useless when compared to the quality of the results one can obtain from the cameras in question (I.e looking at pictures rather than measurebating). This is where the 75 rides over almost every DSLR lens available and many M lenses as well. In addition “old” reviews are useless, because they don’t factor in the increased resolution of modern sensors.

    • Anonymous

      You have to give these lenses time. Of course its incredibly overpriced, but its also new. Let the early adapters take the hit.

      Look at the 12-35, you got $200 off a few months after release, and look at completed listings on ebay – you can get one as low as $800 used.

    • Es

      How can you blame Oly?

      On Ebay.de olympusmarket just sold a REFURBISHED 75mm f/1.8 for I shit you not, US $1,074.70

      If people are willing to pay those kind of prices, can you blame Olympus for taking their money?

    • The Real Stig

      “but I can’t help but notice the bokeh of this expensive lens is as shitty and blown out”

      You really couldn’t be more wrong if you were deliberately trolling – oh wait….

  • nikku

    The cheapskates on here crack me up. If it’s too expensive for you, don’t buy it. But don’t sit there and say that the lens isn’t any good just because you’re a tightwad.

    What do you think a lens like this would cost if you slapped a red dot on it?

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

      Well in this case you just have to prove that you bought the lens, instead of boasting. And that you didn’t sell your sister in the process. LOL doesn’t cost much to write a sentence…

  • http://onemoll.com johan

    i like it
    Thanks,
    infome about Full Olympus 75mm f/1.8 review at ePhotozine.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close