Showing posts with label High Grade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label High Grade. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Olympus 25mm f/1.8 lens

Many people have high regard for the normal view--i.e., the view that humans are supposed to commonly have.

Using Four-Thirds, the normal view lens was not readily available.  Sure, you could use a zoom lens, and the 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 had great image quality, but there was no 25mm fixed focal length lens.  Eventually, Olympus designed and built the very average 25mm f/2.8 pancake lens.  Panasonic also had a 25mm lens, with an f/1.4 maximum aperture, designed by Leica, and supposedly hand built by Panasonic, mainly for the Leica Digilux 3.  I have one, and it's a great lens, and even works well on my Panasonic GH3, aperture ring and all.  It was difficult to find.

Four-Thirds Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 on GH3 body, not sitting flat
E-5 with Four-Thirds 25mm f/1.4

When micro Four-Thirds arrived, there was no 25mm lens.  Eventually, Panasonic had another Leica-labeled 25mm f/1.4 available.  It's about half the price of the Four-Thirds version and much, much smaller--46mm filter size vs 62mm.  Still, at US$599.99, it's not cheap.  The image quality isn't as good as the Four-Thirds version but it's not nearly as huge or heavy or pricy but there sometime seem to be back/front-focusing problems, typically a Sigma problem.

micro Four-Thirds users needed a cheap(er) alternative.  If you can go out and buy a Canon 50mm f/1.8 for US$89.99, why can't you buy something similar for micro Four-Thirds?  Of course, the 50mm lens on cheap Canon dSLRs is equivalent to 75mm in 135 format terms.  A 35mm f/1.8 (effective 52.5mm) will be quite a bit more expensive.

So, Olympus has introduced their 25mm f/1.8.  It's not like the Four-Thirds version at all, thankfully.  It's not a pancake-style lens.  If you've seen the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lens, you already know the basic shape of the 25mm f/1.8 lens.  Since it's not a pancake lens, it's likely to eschew all those nasty compromises.  It should focus much faster than Panasonic's dear 20mm f/1.7 lens, which doesn't have enough room for a faster motor.  However, the new Olympus 25mm lens is US$399.99.

I realize that it's 2014 and that products aren't cheap and that Olympus can't price it as though they're going to sell 1 billion of them.  They should be including the lens hood at that price.

However,  the only inexpensive lenses they have for micro Four-Thirds are the kit zoom lenses and the body cap lenses.  The 9mm f/8.0 fish eye body cap lens looks quite useful but still rather expensive, US$99.00, for the image quality and lack of electronics.

What bothers me is that all of the Four-Thirds High Grade lenses were a bargain, especially when you counted that they were weather-sealed, and yet Olympus has produced many expensive micro Four-Thirds lenses which are susceptible to the elements of nature.  I've used the 12mm f/2.0 extensively and it's lovely, but how is it worth the price when it can be destroyed by weather so easily?

I think that this is also a problem for the new 25mm f/1.8 lens.  At the price, it should be more functional and more protected.

I've found Robin Wong's view of the Olympus 25mm f/1.8 vs the Panasonic/Leica design f/1.4 lens to be interesting.  You may want to look.  Apparently, he's gotten a huge number of rude comments that were unnecessary.  I've read his findings again and find no reason to doubt them.  He could have a fine copy of the Olympus lens and a bad copy of the Panasonic lens.  I certainly haven't had any luck with my own micro Four-Thirds lenses at all.  My next purchase was to be the Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 lens since it's so amazing, even on my Panasonic GH3.

The incorrect focusing problem of the Panasonic lens seems like the typical Sigma problem.  Why does that pertain?  Sigma is supposedly responsible for the manufacture of the Panasonic 25mm lens, even though it was designed by Leica Panasonic, approved by Leica.  Sigma has had quite a few calibration issues in the past.  They even have a special lens dock to help you correct the calibration problems at home.  (Apparently, the latest 18-35mm f/1.8 lens that is well-regarded has focusing issues.  I'm looking at buying one with a Nikon mount for use with a Metabones SpeedBooster for video recording on my GH4.)

As with the Olympus 45mm f/1.8, the 25mm f/1.8 is more than the sum of its parts.  It's not economical in a way that the Canon and Nikon dSLRs 50mm f/1.8 lenses are, but then, they have many drawbacks, such as having to stop down to f/2.8 to get decent sharpness, or f/5.6 to get optimal sharpness and they're not normal view lenses (for Nikon, 75mm equivalent in 135 Format terms) for the majority of the APS-C-sensored bodies on which they're used anyway.  Who would put a US$100 lens on a 135 Format frame camera body like the D800 or 5DMkIII?

I can understand that people feel that their purchase of the Panasonic lens was under attack in Robin's blog entry, just because there was a comparison that didn't validate their purchase 100%.  The truth is--it doesn't matter.  You buy the lens, you use the lens, you like the lens--why should that change?  You shouldn't attack someone because his findings don't agree with your findings or your opinion.

For 99% of the users for such a lens, will they even notice?

It reminds me of a software contractor I knew who invited me to his house, as he was auditioning speakers for his stereo system.  He played a number of classical pieces and I having played many of the piano pieces on 30 or so models of pianos was skeptical.  He and his friends switched cables, and they all came up with various witty comments, discerning invisible (to me) differences.  (I could have been wrong, but I've heard so many pianos from the keyboard, that it's difficult to not know the sound.)  At some point, he switched back to his original set, and played the various pieces again.  I could identify every piano being played, almost immediately.

If the product suits you, does it matter what anyone else thinks?  Do the numbers matter more than the experience using the product, or more than the results you get from using the product?

Update 2014.03.16: Apparently, more than a few reviewers have been pleased with the 25mm f/1.8.  I have no need for the lens but I'm sure that it would work well.  I'm just thankful that my lens is fully supported on the GH3.

Update 2015.04.08: I traded the GH3 for the E-M1 back in June, and finally got the GH4 in December 2014.  I'm still pleased with the Four-Thirds version of Leica's 25mm f/1.4 using the adapter.  I've used it on multiple occasions at skate parks in the evening and it's as amazing as it always was.  It's unfortunate that it isn't weather-sealed.

Update 2015.11.22: I just bought the new Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 lens for US$99.00 instead of US$249.00.  At the full price, I would consider paying the premium for the Olympus lens.  However, at the reduced price, minimal differences are ever minimized.  What would be good would be a 25mm lens with image stabilization.

Given that I now have 3 micro Four-Thirds bodies, this will be of good use.  It is small, light, and useful.  At the price, it did not stop my plans for any other lens.  While I love the Leica/Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 that works well on Four-Thirds bodies, it can be a problem on micro Four-Thirds.

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Surprised by the Olympus E-M5

I'm jaded and cynical and anything else that would lead you to believe that I don't believe much anymore.

So, Olympus brings out a new series of camera bodies to supplement the PEN series: OM-D.  Yes, sure, the OM-system was amazing.  Olympus shocked Nikon into making smaller camera bodies.  You only need compare the Nikon F2 with the Olympus OM-1 to see why.

I used an OM-1N for years and it was quite good and the results were amazing.  I was more than pleased with lens quality, even though I didn't have the best of the best.  When the OM-1N failed and couldn't be repaired, I settled on an IS-series camera and it was adequate, but as a Zoom Lens Reflex (ZLR), it had to be everything to everyone and it wasn't.  Now, we have those SLR-like superzoom cameras that follow Olympus' lead.  The IS-20DLX that I had took photos that were good as snapshots.  It had scene modes and it was pleasant to use but it was a snapshot camera.  Ugggh.

Olympus even transitioned those into the digital world with the D-500/D-600, C-2500L (the first with TruePIC), and the E-10/E-20 pair.  The add-on lens was an interesting way to add capabilities, as long as you followed the rules.  Otherwise, you ruined film or had a digital shot to delete but you might have gotten a bit closer, hand you done things correctly.

When Olympus introduced the E-1, they said goodbye to the ZLR, and exclaimed that they had entered the world of the SLR again, after a long hiatus from the OM-4Ti.  I was so enthusiastic that I bought an E-1, the 50-200mm and 14-54mm lenses a few months after release.  (Version 1.0 isn't for me, generally.)

I was surprised that it worked so well.  I had tried various dSLRs and they were sluggish and gave poor photos and didn't seem worth the trouble.  In 2004, there just wasn't the software for processing raw files and Olympus' JPEG files were the envy of every camera maker.

Today, we have the E-M5.  It's about as close to the OM-4Ti as could be possible.  Unfortunately, they couldn't stuff a 24x36mm sensor in there.  Fortunately, they didn't have to do that.  Reading review after review, it seems that it works quite well.  In fact, for a lot of shots, it works better than the E-5 "professional" camera body.  This bothers me to no end because I bought an E-5 in November of 2011.  (Yes, yes, get over it.  I know.)  Of course, I just have to shoot sports and I realize that I'm not having a bit of trouble with the E-5.

I have a few reservations about the E-M5 for sports photography:

  • it's slippery like the OM-series
  • the lens quality is lower than what I have
  • the ISO sensitivity values are apparently not close to accurate

There is an add-on hand/battery grip, just like the OM-4Ti had, so even if it's slippery or unbalanced, that hand grip will help.

The lens quality issue isn't going away any time soon.  Olympus was (and is still) knocked for the size and weight of the High Grade and Super High Grade lenses.  They've gone small with the micro Four-Thirds lenses and that means lower quality and smaller maximum apertures.  That doesn't work for me.

The ISO sensitivity values are apparently far from what they should be.  I've forgotten how far, but 6400 may only be 4000, as a non-factual example.  What I recall was much further off.  I've been complaining about ISO 1600 with the E-5 and if its calibration was off like the E-M5's is and I was seeing ISO 1000-quality shots for ISO 1600, I'd probably be thrilled, until I learnt the truth.  (I'm still not happy with ISO 800 on the E-5.)

Few people seem to have reservations and a lot of people have ordered.  Apparently, so many that Olympus are struggling to make and ship enough, for the first in a very long time.  Congratulations to them!  I'm glad for their success.

They've been talking about a professional micro Four-Thirds camera body for a while.  I'm listening for any news about it, but they have to provide lenses and somehow keep the detractors from saying "huge", "heavy", and "pricey" while providing the amazing quality that we've come to know from the HG and SHG lines.  I'm looking at Nikon every day and wondering if I'll take the plunge and switch.  Nikon hasn't proven anything much to me, though.  The D300S doesn't look much better than the E-5, especially considering the lens choices.

Maybe, the E-M6 will arrive quickly, or maybe, it'll be an E-7 since the bit about some quick changes to the E-5 in 2011 still haven't happened.  Maybe, Nikon will get with it, ditch the 1 system, and provide a blow out mirror-less system camera but that's not their way because it's not safe.

Update 2014.01.10: The time has come for the E-M5 to be replaced.  Supposedly, the replacement will be the E-M10.  As the name implies (think OM-1, OM-10), it will be slotted under the E-M1.  The E-M5 got some awards, including Camera of the Year from the most unlikely source--DPReview.  Hopefully, they'll fix the mushy buttons and replace the viewfinder with something similar to the excellent unit used in the E-M1.