• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

new Olympus lenses officially announced


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 otola

otola

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 20 September 2016 - 07:51 PM

The 12-100mm f4 zoom lens focusses much closer at 12mm than at 100mm. Interesting but it can be a bit of a bother (I get the same thing when using my 70-200mm with extension tube).

Olympus puts this 24-200mm f8 FF equivalent lens next to a FF 24-70 f4 + 70-200mm f4 combination. A bit silly.

It is more comparable to the likes of Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM which is a 14-120mm f2.8-5 MFT equivalent.

 

The specs show quite a lot of focal length shortening towards minimum focus distance with only 0.21x at 0.45m MFD. A nice lens (focal range and sharpness), shame about the small aperture and high price.

 

The 30mm macro appears to be a very nice little lens, but no mention of any light accessories to help with illumination with the extremely short subject distance to the front of the lens.

Regarding the 12-100, what is the "shame" exactly? Larger aperture would make it way too big and unsuitable as one-lens-fits-all travel lens (especially for portable mFT) and can you tell me what other long zoom starting at 12 mm with weather proofing, class-leading IS, excellent built quality and *likely* IQ can be had for less, or even at all? There aren't any - certainly not the Canon consumer zooms and pro Canon zooms are easily $2K. It's a lot of money sure, but reasonable for what you get in my opinion.



#22 joachim

joachim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 600 posts
  • Locationon a diverging trajectory

Posted 20 September 2016 - 10:43 PM

Robin Wong has a blog entry about the Oly 25mm f1.2 with many images here: https://robinwong.bl...ens-review.html

The rendering is indeed quite nice, but the lens is huge. The Pany 25 f1.4 is tiny in comparison... albeit not close in IQ.


How did you reach to that conclusion? I could not see any side-by-side to the Summilux.
enjoy

#23 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:25 AM

12-100 looks pretty sweet for travel, weather sealed, better range, better build, extraordinary IS, but the price is a bit high.

#24 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,290 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 05:23 AM

12-100 looks pretty sweet for travel, weather sealed, better range, better build, extraordinary IS, but the price is a bit high.

 

MFT lenses were never cheap (other than the kit stuff).


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#25 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 07:12 AM

Regarding the 12-100, what is the "shame" exactly?

The very high price in combination to the very small aperture. That is a shame.



#26 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,290 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 10:19 AM

All travel zoom lenses have a small aperture.
This lens has to be compared to something like the C28-300L - I'm not aware of another pro 'super'-zoom lens.
The Canon lens is substantially bigger and more expensive. Go back from there and the Oly is reasonable.
  • goran h and JoJu like this
Chief Editor
photozone.de

#27 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 10:33 AM

All travel zoom lenses have a small aperture.
This lens has to be compared to something like the C28-300L - I'm not aware of another pro 'super'-zoom lens.
The Canon lens is substantially bigger and more expensive. Go back from there and the Oly is reasonable.

No other travel zoom with an FF equivalent of f8 costs $1300.

 

Saying this lens should be compared to  the Canon EF 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 L IS USM is strange to say the least...

This 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 is a 14-150mm f1.75-2.8 MFT equivalent lens.

 

The Canon EF-M 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM is a much closer match to this Olympus. Yes, it is not weather sealed. And the price is $800 less. And it is almost half the weight.



#28 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,290 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 10:51 AM

Since when is the 18-150mm STM an L lens?
Chief Editor
photozone.de

#29 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,290 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 11:00 AM

A lens which is sort-of comparable may be the

 

Fuji 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 (=27-106mm f/5.3-8.5)

490g

75.7 x 97.8mm

MSRP: 900 US$

 

Olympus 12-100 f/4 = (24-200mm f/8)

561g

77.5 x 116.5 mm

MSRP: 1300US$

 

The Fuji isn't a great lens - and not marketed as pro grade anyway. However, even so, I don't see how the Oly is unreasonable in this comparison.

 

 

 


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#30 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 12:15 PM

Since when is the 18-150mm STM an L lens?

Why do you say it has to be an L lens? What does that L add, besides weather sealing?

 

Oh right, a red stripe. I forgot about that...

 

The Fuji 18-135mm is indeed very comparable to the Canon 18-150mm, focal length range and aperture wise. It should of course be 18-202mm. Both are comparable to the Olympus 12-100mm f4, where the Olympus has an advantage at the wide end and the Canon at the long end. 

The Olympus has the advantage of being weather sealed, and the Canon of being only $500 and quite a bit less heavy.

 

The Canon L lens has a much bigger aperture throughout the range, and has quite a bit longer tele reach too. It can best be compared with the Nikkor 28-300mm and Tamron 28-300mm, where the Canon is weather sealed and has the better optics (and the highest price by far).



#31 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,290 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 September 2016 - 12:31 PM

Canon 28-300L:

1670g

92mm x 184mm

 

Tamron 28-300:

560g
74.4mm x 96mm 

 

But I'm sure you will tell us that there's no reason for the difference, right ?


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#32 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 12:47 PM

Canon 28-300L:

1670g

92mm x 184mm

 

Tamron 28-300:

560g
74.4mm x 96mm 

 

But I'm sure you will tell us that there's no reason for the difference, right ?

What is your problem in this discussion? You brought up that Canon L lens... Not me.

I find that Canon L lens to be too high priced and too heavy, not a fan of that. Does not mean I should not point out that it does not really make for a good comparison to this 12-100mm f4 from Olympus! You wrote a whole article about equivalence not too long ago, so that at least should be apparent.

 

For the Canon L compared to the Tamron and Nikon one could make the case that the Tamron has too small elements, making it vignet rather heavy, and that the Canon's optics perform quite a bit better. 

You made the same performance argument about the Fuji vs. the Oly, above.

 

But both the Canon 18-150mm and Oly 12-100mm seem to perform quite well, judging from their manufacturer's MTFs. I still don't get why they are not to be compared.



#33 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:01 PM

The very high price in combination to the very small aperture. That is a shame.


Price and aperture are not the only parameters in the equation right? I guess the point is some people appreciate the values of other parameters

#34 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:02 PM

Price and aperture are not the only parameters in the equation right? I guess the point is some people appreciate the values of other parameters

Yes, like I pointed out, the Olympus is weather sealed. And it goes a bit wider, where the Canon goes a bit more narrow and the Fuji does neither.



#35 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:05 PM

Yes, like I pointed out, the Olympus is weather sealed. And it goes a bit wider, where the Canon goes a bit more narrow and the Fuji does neither.

6.5 stop IS perhaps? Starts from 24 equiv. Perhaps? Super fast and accurate S-AF perhaps?

And why, people pay same amount of money for an ipad, while the can have much more computing power if they buy a simple laptop?

#36 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:10 PM

Well, good thing is Olympus's price does come down quite a bit after some time. 45 1.8 can be had for free quite often with promotion. Second hand price for mint 12-40 2.8 is typically around 550 USD in my region…so all hope is not lost for this new 12-100

#37 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,562 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:15 PM

6.5 stop IS perhaps? Starts from 24 equiv. Perhaps? Super fast and accurate S-AF perhaps?

No, the lens does not have 6.45 stops IS as far as I know. That is a perk of the Olympus camera body. 

About 24mm, what do you think "And it goes a bit wider" means?

How fast the AF is totally will depend on the camera body. I thought we were talking about a lens, and that to me $1300 seems steep for what is a FF equivalent f8 zoom.



#38 chlky0001

chlky0001

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 32 posts

Posted 21 September 2016 - 01:32 PM

No, the lens does not have 6.45 stops IS as far as I know. That is a perk of the Olympus camera body.
About 24mm, what do you think "And it goes a bit wider" means?
How fast the AF is totally will depend on the camera body. I thought we were talking about a lens, and that to me $1300 seems steep for what is a FF equivalent f8 zoom.

No lens exists in vacuum, the pleasure of using such a lens of course has be assessed in conjunction with the camera.

The lens, combined with the certain camera, does provide a 6.5 stop IS, and too bad no other combinations you mentioned has this. Same goes to AF, same goes to the weight and range.

(Btw, I'm not entirely convinced how fast the AF is will totally be dependent on body)

I agree price is high. But I object the notion that price should mainly be determined by equivalency.

Anw, generally speaking, the value of any object is always a very subjective topic. So it is very common to see different views. Olympus will eventually know if they have succeeded in creating enough value for enough people.

#39 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 542 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 21 September 2016 - 03:23 PM

BC vs everyone: round 4

 

Let me grab some popcorn and seat comfortably for the fight  :P

 

GO!


  • Rover likes this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#40 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,273 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 21 September 2016 - 03:44 PM

party39x18.gif






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de