Olympus Body Cap lens ranks at 2872th place at DxOmark. 75mm review by T.Robichaud.

Share

Olympus body cap lens:
DxOmark (Click here) tested the Olympus Body Cap lens. I guess they did it just for fun to see how low the quality is. And indeed the lens ranks at 2872th place: “No photographer buying a $49, 9mm long body cap lens is expecting optical perfection. Instead this lens is a bit of fun, a curiosity, a point and shoot option that’s a bit quirky and doesn’t cost much money. The limited focusing, fixed 15mm focal length and f/8 aperture will be overly restrictive for some and the latter means you’ll need to shoot in decent light, unless you’re really going to crank up the ISO. Those restrictions however will often make you work in a different way and who knows, you might be pleasantly surprised by the results.
Curiosity: Pentax today announced a body cpa lens for the Q system too (Source: MR).

Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens:
Now let’s rise the bar from the worse to the best lens. Our friend Tyson Robichaud (Click here) tested the Olympus 75mm f/1.8: “It’s sharp, too sharp some may even say for portraiture as you’ll potentially need to be softening skin to get the most flattering results in certain situations.  The price is high, but that is what it is.  Should Olympus have provided a hood and sealing at this price point?  I think so yes, but once you get over that hurdle, you won’t be left wanting from a pure image quality standpoint.
Lens price check at Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay.
Thord party and cheap hoods in US ($7 on amazon), US ($32 better quality), Germany (ebay) and Hong Kong (ebay).

Mirrorless Workshop by Giulio Sciorio:
Award winner Giulio Sciorio and known MFT user organized a new workshop that some of you might be interested to follow: More here: http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/workshops/

Share
  • While I agree that the 15/8 isn’t exactly a stellar optic, DxOs lens tests are completely worthless. They heavily rely on what camera is used, and they also rank ‘transmission’ as an absolute quantity and put heavy emphasis on it. That means a mediocre 50/1.2 will often rank equal or better than a very, very good f/2.8 zoom. The Samyang 85/1.4 is rated higher than the Oly 75/1.8. I own both…while the 85/1.4 is a very good lens, the 75 absolutely destroys it….but the 75 isn’t tested on a FF Nikon with higher resolution, and it’s 2/3 stop slower, so it gets heavily skewed.

    • Eliz

      @Jordan S.

      “completely worthless”

      Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.

    • another_human

      If you are so against the DXOMark methodology, where is your improvement? Do you have some method that is better?

      Sorry but DXO is the only public metric that gives us a way to measure lens’ against each other objectively. Sure it is not perfect but without it we would be the poorer.

      As usual we are so keen to bring down the work of others rather than create ourselves.

      • The traditional MTF metric might be better than DXO’s elaborate perceived resolution. The transmission a lens offers is a feature, not a measure of quality (especially if resolution at maximum aperture is not weighted into the overall score). Otherwise, a reliable metric for evaluating micro-contrast is still soaringly needed.

        • Me

          > The transmission a lens offers is a feature, not a measure of quality

          Sorry, but that’s completely false. The transmission tells you if the given speed can really be achieved by the lens. A lens with a declared speed of e.g. 1.4, which has really a transmission of 2.0 wide open, is a bad one, because the glass eats too much light.

        • +1 on the desperate need for measuring Micro-Contrast aspect of a lens.

          I’m not saying that’s everything in a good lens, but it surely is a very important aspect of a quality lens.

      • true homer

        I actually HAVE better method, I suspect Jordan uses it too, its called taking photos and looking at them.

        • another_human

          that is by definition a subjective measure, not an objective measure. Please read what i wrote and understand it before making superfluous remarks.

          • MarcoSartoriPhoto

            I agree with True Homer: seeing what a photographer can do with a lens is to me the best way to know what that camera and lenses COULD do.

          • usa tuunaneen

            What you wrote is stupid, there is no need to discuss it.

          • All photography is subjective. There is NO other criteria,

            • Photography is a form of expressive art. Yes, of course technology is the other half of photography, so while it should be subjective, it shouldn’t be entirely.

              • For the vast majority of camera buyers the choice was entirely subjective. Just look at the number of buyers who purchase cameras that have foibles and idiosyncrasies that they love to hate and work hard to compensate for. M9 terrible noise, Fuji wont focus and so on. These purchases are subjective, ego and kudos, or fell in love with the image quality are all subjective. As a twist, subject to their finances, see subjective!!!!

      • Gee, you’re right, I don’t create myself…except that I run a reviews website and have written over 100 articles on photography for it in the past year.

        While my reviews are not empirical data type, I use a lens and note its strengths and weaknesses in real world shooting.

        As to those that more objectively measure a lens performance with much greater accuracy with regards to actual lens performance, I find the reviews from SLRGear and LensTip to be among the best. DxO is good for camera sensors (though not without some flaws), but their lens rating system is awful.

        • I agree! The world would be a beter place if we would stop mentioning DxO altogether…

      • Duarte Bruno

        I’ll take a MTF chart over DxOMark’s lens performance index anytime.
        I believe their work is meritable on sensor testing and I think their charts are invaluable, but when they put all that together in a single number they hide al their work behind a number that doesn’t tell their readers shit.

      • Ned

        DXO are a joke. It is so obvious they are in the pockets of you know who. They are making Nikon a fortune with their endorsement. Remember their hand wringing, ridiculous delay with the E-M5. The emperors new clothes. If the non deluded actually looked they would see what a proper digital system can do rather than keeping the dinosaur alive with a drip.

      • All lens testing should be done without a camera. The only way to do a technical evaluation is to test the lens ‘stand alone’. Any other test using a camera is complicated by the camera itself and image itself. EG If a lens gives different results on different brands of camera the it is not a lens test. It is a combination test. The real test is what the image looks like for a combination.
        I think I noted somewhere, can’t remember where though, that Leica use stand alone lens testing to test lenses as lenses. (I can be corrected of course)

    • eden

      the cap lens looked interesting but non-sense in terms of photo sense until i saw the oly adv and the fact that a nos of gal now like to hang a camera over their neck as fashion.

      the oly adv actually show gals hanging the pl3 with the cap lens. i did see a couple of yrs ago a gal hanged a slr with a plain lens cap.

      so, the cap lens may look funny to you guys, but actually it is oly s response to the expanding demand from female users on mirrorless camera.

  • ED

    What difference does a hood really give? I hav nvr used one b4. I mean is it just to reduce lens flares or does it also affect the overall quality of a picture say for example on a sunny day? Coz i sometimes intentionally try to get lens flares and i can’t!

    • Hello

      1) The hood can save your lens when you bump it or drop it.
      2) The hood reduces flare, the massive sort and the veiling sort, so it can improve colours and contrast.
      Veiling flare may be hard to notice, and many photographers tend to bump their cameras all the times, so the hood should be always on.

  • So it’s official, I own a copy of the world’s worst lens. It’s a fun little thing though and the results are not quite so terrible. Two weeks ago I was shooting with it in the streets of Prague, in the snow. The results please me immensely.

    • Naah, it’s not the world’s worst lens — merely the worst lens DxO has tested so far. Note that they haven’t tested the Holga lens for u4/3, or an SLR Magic “Toy Lens.” These three would actually make for a fun comparison…

      • MarcoSartoriPhoto

        Exactly. That lens-cap (I own it so I can speak) is sort of a toy. It’s a “fast and bright pinhole” (I know pinholes are a different thing..). I haven’t shoot a lot with it, but I can say that under bright light the center is sharp. Using it with b&w tones is funny.

  • OMega

    Maybe it’s time for DxO to test the Pin Wide, now that would be an interesting read.

  • ArtP

    As a lens it may be at the bottom, but it could well have the best optics of any current body cap. And if you look at the Q cap lens- no focusing and no lens cover, so even if the optics on that one are good, they could go downhill fast.

  • Awe shucks. I was hoping to replace my leica with this. 😛

    • Excellent idea, Giulio. I’ve got a spare 15mm f/8 at home — send me your Leica (I’ll… dispose… of it properly), and I’ll send you the lens! Wouldn’t want you to miss out on the compact goodness.

    • MarcoSartoriPhoto

      I’m ready to give you my old EPL2 too! 😀

  • mapleflot

    All I can say is somehow the 15/8 has become my most-used lens if I am shooting randomly on the street. The rest seem so fiddly by comparison that I miss shots.

  • Abraham

    Seems silly to spend time reviewing a toy. It was clearly dome for buzz, not for education, esowcially as there are so many other lenses they could review from olympus.

  • $49 is NOT that cheap. For that much money, one should expect decent image quality considering the lens has no aperture, no autofocus, no zoom, slow f/8, it ought to at least be a sharp lens for that price.

    Remember that the kit lens only costs an extra $50 if you buy it with the camera.

    • Sören

      Think about that a decent achromate Macro-snap on lens like the Raynox cost’s more than 50$.

    • MarcoSartoriPhoto

      Center is sharp, if there’s a good light. Don’t expect to take sharp pictures of children running around though..

  • true true homer

    you are not the true homer

  • adaptor-or-die

    It relative and subjective, it isn’t an expensive buy, when you look at the options. I saw an OEM Lumix lens cap on ebay yesterday at $45. Now that is expensive. Because I can buy a Chinese one for a couple bucks. I can’t buy a 15mm f/8 MFT lens for a couple bucks? Sure a PinWide is $40 bucks and will do similar 11mm and f96/128 withstanding … I have two PENs currently and one has a pinwide and one a Oly “cookie” Both options are fun, and useful.

    And those two toy lens mean I can ignore the real rip-offs in the world like $50 Holgas, $100 Dianas and Lomo plastic through the roof … or how about the most popular overpriced no frills camera out there, the Apple iphone? One $49 dollar Oly lens replaces all that drek and it covers my sensor as well …

  • Andrew

    While shooting in bright daylight with f/8 wouldn’t be a problem, there are still plenty of times where a bigger aperture is necessary. Ya know, sometimes, there’s this thing called shade. And sometimes subjects are sitting in it. Or you want to pull more out of the shadows but you can’t because you were at f/8. Considering all the wide lenses thus far(12/1.6, 12/2, 14/2.5, 15/8, 9-18, 7-14, 12-35), I really think the 14mm f/2.5 is THE street lens for micro four thirds. I think it’s focal length is perfect. The 12’s are too wide, one is MF-only, the other is usually found in silver. Not covert at all. The UWAs are too slow, and too big. The only other lens I’d consider is the 12-35. But I love the discreet size and color, decent speed, focal length, and cost. Just because this 15/8 is cheap doesn’t mean it’s not a waste of money. If you’re considering this lens, justtake your $50 and give yourself a $50 discount towards a lens could really use, as opposed to this one not-so-good trick pony.

  • W. C.

    The Olympus BCL is meant to be a joke. Seriously. I mean, yeah, a joke. A clever Olympus marketing trick to draw attention to the brand and get people worked up over nothing really. It works. (Lens and marketing.)

  • Jeff

    I think this is the best lens ever. It’s better than all the Nikon and Canon lenses I own. That’s why I hate the m4/3 so much. And then you have the 75mm which is even more better. It’s not right, paying 5000 for a camera should mean it’s better than that 900 camera. And those bigger heavier lenses should be better too. It’s just not fair they aren’t.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    Here is a shot taken with this toy lens cap:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcosartoriphoto/8429770543/lightbox/

    Not spectacular but it’s not that crappy. It looks I took it with a dramatic filter, but I’m not sure, since I rarely use art filters.

    • Jeff

      Using art filters is just wrong. Not everybody has those, even the big expensive cameras I sleep with.

      • MarcoSartoriPhoto

        Unfortunately it was the only photo I could find in my iPad taken with this lenscap.again, I’m not sure it was filtered, since I rarely use them (only b&w). I’m more and more convinced it was simply an evening sky, before a storm. I remember exactly where I was and with who. 😉 I have also a “fight” between young boys: they were playing football near the street, and they started to fight. I can’t post it because their faces are clearly visible (that’s why I say this lens is sharp enough). I took it while I was waiting in the car, the light was red. The good thing about his lens is of course its hyperfocal. You can shoot without looking at the camera nor at the subject.

    • Well done. Hitchcock is looking at the birds very carefully.
      By the way I see you have a shot lot of old left over unsellable DxO test results you titled ‘Stair of knowledge’. Jokes aside great concept for a photo, great title.

      • Why moderation?

        • admin

          Your wrote “Hitchcock”. And when somebody writes “cock” it gets into moderation 🙂

          • Sorry. I will ask him to allow us to change his name. But I need a medium!

    • Well done. Hitchcock is looking at the birds very carefully.
      By the way I see you have a shot lot of old left over unsellable DxO test results you titled ‘Stair of knowledge’. Jokes aside great concept for a photo, great title.

  • RumorReader

    Beg to differ I like this lens, I am using it for a certain project, tried my 14/2.5 but it was too sharp, this 15/8 is just right for a certain type of rendering that I can’t create in post.

    • BBB

      That’s because you are a photographer, a very rare species online 🙂

  • Dwaine Dibbly

    It’s the best lens ever. Why? Simple, really. If the best camera is the camera that you can always carry, then the best lens is the one that is small enough to let you take your camera with you more often.

    OK, so that’s mostly in jest, but I do think there’s a grain of truth there.

  • All those up above me who haven’t used the lens (those who have just smile quietly to outselves), have a Google for images taken with it, and be pleasantly surprised.
    If a photograph pleases you, then it’s a good photograph. If it was taken with the 15mm f/8 lens, then it’s a good lens.
    Good night.

    • Izumi. That is a great comment.

      • I blush.
        And apologise for the typo. Of course, we smile softly to ourselves.
        Thank you.

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