Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 - Mk1, Mk2 & Mk3 Owners Thread

snerkler said:
There's a rumoured 12-45mm f4 lens. Could make for a good lightweight walk around alternative to the 12-40mm f2.8 and 12-100mm f4. If there is one and it's weather sealed it could certainly have my interest.
Click to expand...

.... Look out for the 'PRO' in the lens title for maximum weather sealing.

m4/3 12-40mm and 12-45mm are both equivalents to the Canon (and Nikon?) best selling 24-70mm full-frame lenses and so a well established market for such walkabout practicality.

Re the m4/3 12-100mm F/4 you mention (Olympus or PL?), as an equivalent to being a 24-200mm and therefore a very wide zoom range, does it suffer from harsh corner vignetting like the new Canon RF 24-240mm does (and which I returned because of it)? Such vignetting is said to be inevitable in lenses with wide-angle > telephoto zoom due to necessary internal optics and regardless of brand. It only happens in RAW files, not JPEG, and can be solved in RAW conversion software but that's not satisfactory as far as I am concerned.
 
RedRobin said:
.... Look out for the 'PRO' in the lens title for maximum weather sealing.
Click to expand...
Yep this is the gold standard.

m4/3 12-40mm and 12-45mm are both equivalents to the Canon (and Nikon?) best selling 24-70mm full-frame lenses and so a well established market for such walkabout practicality.
Click to expand...
They are but for a light setup I prefer the F4 version over the f2.8, just imagine how light a 12-45mm f4 would be in m4/3 format (y)

Re the m4/3 12-100mm F/4 you mention (Olympus or PL?), as an equivalent to being a 24-200mm and therefore a very wide zoom range, does it suffer from harsh corner vignetting like the new Canon RF 24-240mm does (and which I returned because of it)? Such vignetting is said to be inevitable in lenses with wide-angle > telephoto zoom due to necessary internal optics and regardless of brand. It only happens in RAW files, not JPEG, and can be solved in RAW conversion software but that's not satisfactory as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...
I've not used one, but everyone who has seems to rave about it.
 
I've just checked the images I shot this year from our holiday to Florida which were exclusively done with the EM1 MK II and the 12-100, and as far as I can tell, there's little to no vignetting that I can tell (and that wide open at F4 @ 12mm). At worst I'd say 1/3rd stop wide open, but as I say I can hardy see it.

I should add that the in camera profiles maybe take care of a lot of that, and I'm not sure if I had the menu option "shading comp." on or off ?

Here's an example (the photo has no merit other than showing what been mentioned). 12mm wide open at F4 - Just a raw imported into LR then exported straight away with no adjustments at all.

 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
I've just checked the images I shot this year from our holiday to Florida which were exclusively done with the EM1 MK II and the 12-100, and as far as I can tell, there's little to no vignetting that I can tell (and that wide open at F4 @ 12mm). At worst I'd say 1/3rd stop wide open, but as I say I can hardly see it.

I should add that the in camera profiles maybe take care of a lot of that, and I'm not sure if I had the menu option "shading comp." on or off ?

Here's an example (the photo has no merit other than showing what been mentioned). 12mm wide open at F4 - Just a raw imported into LR then exported straight away with no adjustments at all.

Click to expand...

.... Many thanks Andrew - Very helpful. :) I'm assuming it's the Olympus ED 12-100mm F/4 IS PRO < EDIT: I have just noticed your lens listed in your forum signature.

The 'vignetting' I found on the Canon RF 24-240mm was black 45 degree corners not unlike a fisheye lens cut off but only at about 24-30mm and only RAW because of how much RAW files capture Canon explained to me.

I have checked my M1X manual and it says that when Peripheral Illumination (Shading Compensation) is enabled the camera body detects any peripheral reduction and compensates onboard. So I interpret that as applying compensation automatically according to the lens rather than globally regardless of the lens mounted when it is enabled 'On'.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
.... Many thanks Andrew - Very helpful. :) I'm assuming it's the Olympus ED 12-100mm F/4 IS PRO.

The 'vignetting' I found on the Canon RF 24-240mm was black 45 degree corners not unlike a fisheye lens cut off but only at about 24-30mm and only RAW because of how much RAW files capture Canon explained to me.

I have checked my M1X manual and it says that when Peripheral Illumination (Shading Compensation) is enabled the camera body detects any peripheral reduction and compensates onboard. So I interpret that as applying compensation automatically according to the lens rather than globally regardless of the lens mounted when it is enabled 'On'.
Click to expand...
Agree also, I have the 12-100 f4 and any amount of vignetting is taken care of fine automatically by the camera or software in post so is not a bother. I will take a picture plain surface though to check, if it turns out bad will update here.
 
jono2002 said:
Agree also, I have the 12-100 f4 and any amount of vignetting is taken care of fine automatically by the camera or software in post so is not a bother. I will take a picture plain surface though to check, if it turns out bad will update here.
Click to expand...

.... IF this lens displays heavy black corners (it's worse than 'vignetting' on the Canon lens) it is most likely to occur at only the widest focal lengths.

The process may not be a bother to take care of in post-p but, if its appearance is black, doing so will almost certainly compromise the composition of the shot you saw in your viewfinder and which you expected to capture. I don't doubt that Olympus Workspace could take care of it just as Canon's own DPP software does for them but not everyone wants to convert their RAW files in Workspace - I don't for example. And also you can't see the problem until the RAW is converted - It's a deal breaker for a lens as far as I am concerned because it limits wide angle use and is invisible while shooting.

However, I rather think that YouTube reviewers would have been all over it if the Olympus lens had this problem.
 
RedRobin said:
.... IF this lens displays heavy black corners (it's worse than 'vignetting' on the Canon lens) it is most likely to occur at only the widest focal lengths.

The process may not be a bother to take care of in post-p but, if its appearance is black, doing so will almost certainly compromise the composition of the shot you saw in your viewfinder and which you expected to capture. I don't doubt that Olympus Workspace could take care of it just as Canon's own DPP software does for them but not everyone wants to convert their RAW files in Workspace - I don't for example. And also you can't see the problem until the RAW is converted - It's a deal breaker for a lens as far as I am concerned because it limits wide angle use and is invisible while shooting.

However, I rather think that YouTube reviewers would have been all over it if the Olympus lens had this problem.
Click to expand...
I’ve never known a lens cause “black” vignetting other than when you use an APS-C lens on FF for example. I wouldn’t accept/buy a lens that has vignetting to that degree :eek:
 
snerkler said:
I’ve never known a lens cause “black” vignetting other than when you use an APS-C lens on FF for example. I wouldn’t accept/buy a lens that has vignetting to that degree :eek:
Click to expand...

.... I sent the lens back after about 10 days trialling it and got a full refund. I assure you that the relatively new Canon RF 24-240mm does have this issue and I have my own images to prove it (unless I have since binned them). Also, Christopher Frost covers it in his lens review on YouTube at about 6:30 :

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLk7GsbPye0
 
RedRobin said:
.... IF this lens displays heavy black corners (it's worse than 'vignetting' on the Canon lens) it is most likely to occur at only the widest focal lengths.

The process may not be a bother to take care of in post-p but, if its appearance is black, doing so will almost certainly compromise the composition of the shot you saw in your viewfinder and which you expected to capture. I don't doubt that Olympus Workspace could take care of it just as Canon's own DPP software does for them but not everyone wants to convert their RAW files in Workspace - I don't for example. And also you can't see the problem until the RAW is converted - It's a deal breaker for a lens as far as I am concerned because it limits wide angle use and is invisible while shooting.

However, I rather think that YouTube reviewers would have been all over it if the Olympus lens had this problem.
Click to expand...
A quick look through it on my camera I can see a tiny bit. As I say it hasn't been an obstacle for me, it's such a handy lens.
 
snerkler said:
Ooh, the 12-45mm f4 is a pro lens, that’s got my interest. There’s also going to be a 100-400mm which takes me by surprise as I thought Panny and Olympus had a deal the couldn’t make the same focal length lenses?
Click to expand...
https://www.43rumors.com/olympus-officially-announces-the-new-mft-lens-roadmap/

Curious about this new 12-45mm f4 PRO lens, what will it offer over the 12-100 f4 PRO or the 12-40 f2.8 PRO?
I can't imagine smaller, lighter or cheaper are in the mix but I could be wrong.
Dual IS?

The new 100-400mm f5-f6.3 non pro might be interesting but likely too much for my limited use.
 
AMcUK said:
https://www.43rumors.com/olympus-officially-announces-the-new-mft-lens-roadmap/

Curious about this new 12-45mm f4 PRO lens, what will it offer over the 12-100 f4 PRO or the 12-40 f2.8 PRO?
I can't imagine smaller, lighter or cheaper are in the mix but I could be wrong.
Dual IS?

The new 100-400mm f5-f6.3 non pro might be interesting but likely too much for my limited use.
Click to expand...
I’d imagine the 12-45mm will be significantly lighter and smaller yes. Consider the size of 24-70mm f4 lenses vs their f2.8 counterparts.
 
Under the banner "bright prime lenses" I would like something wider than the 17mm please.
Something like a 14mm f/1.2 or even maybe a 12mm f/1.2 would be nice
 
snerkler said:
Ooh, the 12-45mm f4 is a pro lens, that’s got my interest. There’s also going to be a 100-400mm which takes me by surprise as I thought Panny and Olympus had a deal the couldn’t make the same focal length lenses?

https://www.43rumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/web_lens_roadmap_191126_en-2_.jpg
Click to expand...

They've made many similar, 45-150/40-150, 12-40/12-35, 75-300/100-300 etc ... often did wonder were they dancing about one another.

I don't see any sense to a 12-45 F4 unless it's very cheap, and as it's got 'pro' to the name then I'm doubting it will be. You can get the 12-40 2.8 for little over £400 new and it's a cracking lens. It's already tiny considering the 'equivalence' - it's got great close focusing and magnification and has a nice MF clutch to boot. This 12-45 better be something real special
 
snerkler said:
I’d imagine the 12-45mm will be significantly lighter and smaller yes. Consider the size of 24-70mm f4 lenses vs their f2.8 counterparts.
Click to expand...
I notice you skipped cheaper ;)

Cagey75 said:
I don't see any sense to a 12-45 F4 unless it's very cheap, and as it's got 'pro' to the name then I'm doubting it will be.
Click to expand...

Out of idle curiosity I stuck a bunch of the standard and superzooms on the EM-5iii
Here:
http://j.mp/35CenRi
I didn't realise the 12-200 is smaller than the 12-100 albeit slower aperture at the longer end.

I guess they've discontinued the 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 EZ lens that used to be bundled with the E-M5 kits so there is some logic to creating something underneath the F2.8 that still has weather sealing etc. that can be bundled.
I can see a kit lens perhaps even as a cheaper entry point for the E-M1iii - if you can offset the slower lens with better stabilisation it will be OK in some circumstances than an older body with f2.8

Not appealing to me at the moment as a 12-40 f2.8 convert.
 
AMcUK said:
I notice you skipped cheaper ;)



Out of idle curiosity I stuck a bunch of the standard and superzooms on the EM-5iii
Here:
http://j.mp/35CenRi
I didn't realise the 12-200 is smaller than the 12-100 albeit slower aperture at the longer end.

I guess they've discontinued the 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 EZ lens that used to be bundled with the E-M5 kits so there is some logic to creating something underneath the F2.8 that still has weather sealing etc. that can be bundled.
I can see a kit lens perhaps even as a cheaper entry point for the E-M1iii - if you can offset the slower lens with better stabilisation it will be OK in some circumstances than an older body with f2.8

Not appealing to me at the moment as a 12-40 f2.8 convert.
Click to expand...

I wonder if that 12-200 was a 5.6 at the longer end how much bigger it would be though?
 
Cagey75 said:
I don't see any sense to a 12-45 F4 unless it's very cheap, and as it's got 'pro' to the name then I'm doubting it will be. You can get the 12-40 2.8 for little over £400 new and it's a cracking lens. It's already tiny considering the 'equivalence' - it's got great close focusing and magnification and has a nice MF clutch to boot. This 12-45 better be something real special
Click to expand...
I love the 12-40mm f2.8, but I'm always interested in seeing if I can make the package smaller and lighter without losing IQ. If it has dual IS then it could negate the difference in light gathering in certain scenarios.
AMcUK said:
I notice you skipped cheaper ;)
.
Click to expand...
Well you would hope so, but as the f2.8 is old now vs a new lens the price difference might not be that much initially.
 
snerkler said:
I love the 12-40mm f2.8, but I'm always interested in seeing if I can make the package smaller and lighter without losing IQ. If it has dual IS then it could negate the difference in light gathering in certain scenarios.

Well you would hope so, but as the f2.8 is old now vs a new lens the price difference might not be that much initially.
Click to expand...

Panasonic12-35mm did that for me, lighter smaller and overall equally good.
Bonus for me that it gives dual is on my Panasonic bodies, still got the 12-40 though
 
tijuana taxi said:
Panasonic12-35mm did that for me, lighter smaller and overall equally good.
Bonus for me that it gives dual is on my Panasonic bodies, still got the 12-40 though
Click to expand...
Didn't realise there was that much difference (runs off to check the specs ;))
 
That was the 2 I was choosing from at the time, but I went for the 12-40 even though I was using a Panasonic body. Going on many reviews the Oly is a tad sharper, has better close up stats and the extra 5mm can make a difference at times. I really like the MF clutch mechanism too.
 
Cagey75 said:
That was the 2 I was choosing from at the time, but I went for the 12-40 even though I was using a Panasonic body. Going on many reviews the Oly is a tad sharper, has better close up stats and the extra 5mm can make a difference at times. I really like the MF clutch mechanism too.
Click to expand...
One other trivial plus for me is the direction of the zoom ring.
It's the same as the 35-100 which I also quite often carry and use on my travels.
12-40 is the opposite and never fails to catch me out, maybe I'm just a bit dopey though
 
tijuana taxi said:
One other trivial plus for me is the direction of the zoom ring.
It's the same as the 35-100 which I also quite often carry and use on my travels.
12-40 is the opposite and never fails to catch me out, maybe I'm just a bit dopey though
Click to expand...

I must be dopey too then, as little things like that oft catch me out too :D I wish they'd all just go the same way!
 
tijuana taxi said:
One other trivial plus for me is the direction of the zoom ring.
It's the same as the 35-100 which I also quite often carry and use on my travels.
12-40 is the opposite and never fails to catch me out, maybe I'm just a bit dopey though
Click to expand...

Cagey75 said:
I must be dopey too then, as little things like that oft catch me out too :D I wish they'd all just go the same way!
Click to expand...

The zoom ring direction should be part of the m4/3 standard I have been using Olympus for years and the PL 8-18mm drives me up the wall when I forget to turn the zoom ring the the correct way.
 
alfbranch said:
The zoom ring direction should be part of the m4/3 standard I have been using Olympus for years and the PL 8-18mm drives me up the wall when I forget to turn the zoom ring the the correct way.
Click to expand...

Which one would they choose though?
 
The upcoming 12-45 looks good to me, was thinking of the cheaper Pana 12-60 just as a gp carry lens.
Here's my thinking, I don't care about weather sealing, I'm not going to stand in the rain taking pictures.
I want a lens that I can carry around that can do quite a usefull range of zoom.
I may want to use it on my pen-f, although the kit zoom is great, the 12mm wide zoom is a good option.
I also have primes 12 and 17 for lower light/night.
Looking at the other lenses and doing a compare, the 75-300 on the right is a lens that I own so it gives me a reference, maybe a Pana or new Oly?
http://j.mp/2OSVS4i
 
I'm really hankering after that 150-400 F4.5 Zoom on the EM1X, but I'm guessing it will be the price of a small family car :)
 
Sootchucker said:
I'm really hankering after that 150-400 F4.5 Zoom on the EM1X, but I'm guessing it will be the price of a small family car :)
Click to expand...
£3500-4000 would be my guess.
 
Pete B said:
The upcoming 12-45 looks good to me, was thinking of the cheaper Pana 12-60 just as a gp carry lens.
Here's my thinking, I don't care about weather sealing, I'm not going to stand in the rain taking pictures.
I want a lens that I can carry around that can do quite a usefull range of zoom.
I may want to use it on my pen-f, although the kit zoom is great, the 12mm wide zoom is a good option.
I also have primes 12 and 17 for lower light/night.
Looking at the other lenses and doing a compare, the 75-300 on the right is a lens that I own so it gives me a reference, maybe a Pana or new Oly?
http://j.mp/2OSVS4i
Click to expand...

You couldn't go wrong with the 12-100 you have shown in your link
If Carlsberg did a do it all lens this would be it, excellent at both ends of the focal length and great stabilisation
Probably find it can dual up with your Pen F ibis and that would give about 6 stops worth

Weather sealing is handy, never know when you might want it
Went for a stroll in the capital the other day with a few others from here
As it got dark the fine but heavy rain fell, just carried on and wiped the camera/lens off later on
 
Last edited:
+1 for the 12-100 - a stunning lens are amazingly better than a superzoom has any right to be. It's the 1st lens that's always packed when I go on a trip as it's so versatile. I pretty much stopped using my 12-40 F2.8 pro when I bought the 12-100 2 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
I'm really hankering after that 150-400 F4.5 Zoom on the EM1X, but I'm guessing it will be the price of a small family car :)
Click to expand...
snerkler said:
£3500-4000 would be my guess.
Click to expand...

.... I'm guessing that price range too - It'll be interesting to see if we are right.

I'm lucky in that having sold my Canon EF 500mm F/4L II (a superb lens) and now about to sell my 1DX-2, I can easily cover the cost. I've got three overseas wildlife trips booked in 2020 and hope this super telephoto zoom will be available at least by September for wild Bears in Finland!
 
Sootchucker said:
+1 for the 12-100 - a stunning lens are amazingly better than a superzoom has any right to be. It's the 1st lens that's always packed when I go on a trip as it's so versatile. I pretty much stopped using my 12-40 F2.8 pro when I bought the 12-100 2 years ago.
Click to expand...

When I owned the 12-40 and the 12-100 showed up, I did ponder on it, but I think I'd actually rather the 12-40 and something like the Oly 75 1.8 instead for the money.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Weather sealing is handy, never know when you might want it
Went for a stroll in the capital the other day with a few others from here
As it got dark the fine but heavy rain fell, just carried on and wiped the camera/lens off later on
Click to expand...

.... And sudden showers, sometimes heavy, or constant drizzle are typical events in UK weather nowadays. The M1X certified standard of weather sealing is one of the reasons I changed my camera system. My Canon cameras were ok but a friend with me at the time shooting on a Canon 5D-4 had to pay £700 for repairs after water got in!

I love photographing birds in the rain and rain covers are an inconvenience which can lose you the shot.

A WET MAGPIE by Robin Procter, on Flickr
 
RedRobin said:
.... And sudden showers, sometimes heavy, or constant drizzle are typical events in UK weather nowadays. The M1X certified standard of weather sealing is one of the reasons I changed my camera system. My Canon cameras were ok but a friend with me at the time shooting on a Canon 5D-4 had to pay £700 for repairs after water got in!

I love photographing birds in the rain and rain covers are an inconvenience which can lose you the shot.

A WET MAGPIE by Robin Procter, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Very nice (y)
 
Can anyone answer this question please. I have just got an e m1x and a 300f4. Just setting it up at the moment and doing the focus points, I have set a single point & a cluster of 9 points. When I press the back button on the single point it comes up Green which seems fine. but with the cluster of 9 when I press BB only one Green square appears and it keeps moving on its own inside 4 brackets in view finder? Should there not be a cluster of 9 Green squares? And not just one moving around? Cheers in advance,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top